jump to last post 1-50 of 192 discussions (1166 posts)

Why do Christians have a problem with Homosexuals?

  1. Mamelody profile image61
    Mamelodyposted 6 years ago

    Ok I usually avoid religious forums like a plague but after my last thread about a certain lesbian woman, it just gave me an idea for another thread smile

    I mean its not just in the hub forums.. its everywhere. But looking at the hub forums it seems Christians always have to have a go at someone or anything that has to so with homosexuals.. So far I haven't seen a Muslim, Buddhist or an atheist have a go at the gays (I may be mistaken)

    I just want to clarify that homosexuality is not something that just showed up in the 20th and 21st Century. If you read your bible you will find that it starts off way in the beginning of creation in the days after Cain kills Abel.

    Yes it's odd that one man may find another man attractive but you guys need to understand the philosophy of "Free Will" God gave every person the choice to decide what they want. This is what makes man a supreme being because we are the only ones with that power.. power of choice. Angels and demons and Aliens have no choice which is why they envy us..

    So if one man chooses to be gay what right has another one have in condemning his choice?? I mean am not gay, and I do feel sad for people that are gay but I respect their choice and love them and treat them the same way as I would treat a straight person.

    So if Christians today just learnt how to actually spread love and not condemn and try and stuff people's throat with "truth" then maybe people will be a little bit more receptive to what you have to say.

    So I appeal to you so called Christians.. Stop bashing the gays and lesbians.. they are people just like you and God sees us all the same. Let God be the judge of them and your duty as a Christian is to pray for them and love them.. Period.

    1. qwark profile image60
      qwarkposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Hi Mame:
      God demands the death of homosexuals in the bible.
      Leviticus

      "And if a man lie with mankind, as with womankind, both of them have committed abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."

      Do ya thing this might be a reason alledged christians hae homosexuals?

      1. Greek One profile image80
        Greek Oneposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Out of curiosity, is there anything in the New Testament you can quote from?

        1. qwark profile image60
          qwarkposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Greek:
          Just go to "Google" and type in "new testament homosexuality."
          ...lotsa thoughts for ya.

          1. Greek One profile image80
            Greek Oneposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            thanks.. i did Google that and I indeed found a reference attributed to St Paul...

            But is there anything you can quote me attributed to the Son of God where he specicially condemns homosexuals?

            I looked, but I just came up with the usual stuff.. you know, like the mandate to turning the other cheek, not judge others, loving your neighbours like you would yourself, not casting the first stone, etc.

            1. TheGlassSpider profile image81
              TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              There is some indication that the word Paul used, which has been translated as "homosexuals," may actually mean "sacred prostitutes." So, depending on who translates it, there might not be any mention of homosexuality at all  the NT.

            2. qwark profile image60
              qwarkposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              ...not that I'm aware of...

            3. livelonger profile image89
              livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              There are none.

              There are, however, 5 instances in which Christ condemns divorce.

              See if any of the evangelicals blast divorce and try to render it illegal. big_smile

              1. TheGlassSpider profile image81
                TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                The Catholic churches around my neck of the woods will still excommunicate someone and not allow them to step foot in their churches if they're divorced. But I understand that's a pretty local phenomenon.

                I've visited Catholic institutions in other areas who wouldn't dream of doing such a thing.

              2. christian107 profile image84
                christian107posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Romans 1:26-27: "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet."

                1 Corinthians 6: 9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor EFFEMINATE, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

                Jude verse 7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

                how about that

                1. Zelkiiro profile image85
                  Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  1. lol the Bible says they received meet [sic], that's just too funny
                  2. Effeminate means to behave in an over-the-top feminine way, not having gay buttsex.
                  3. "Strange flesh" sounds more like bestiality than homosexuality to me.

            4. brotheryochanan profile image60
              brotheryochananposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Some things are just spiritual common sense.
              If sex outside of marriage is a no no and societies condemned same sex marriage around the world, then safe to assume that lesbianism would fall under the same category as no no. Societies used to be a fairly good indicator of what god pretty much basically wants, although you could argue that but some of what i just said applies.
              Just recently same sex marriage is being okayed, but god doesn't change his morales to fit society. In fact a great turning away is predicted before the end times and we see this happening as society enlarges is borders about what is right and wrong. God does not play along with what the governor of california thinks.
              No debate is really needed. The reason i don't pray for an answer to this question is because i am not stumped and nor do i sway on the spiritual application involved.
              God did demand the death of homosexuals in the OT. Fleshly desires was judged both harshly and immediately back then but nontheless, dealt with, just because there is no pillar of fire or manna falling from the sky or an highpriest governing our country does not mean that judgment is not on the horizon or that god has lessened his principles. A thief will get the same treatment as a liar and as all unsaved who know not god. But not just yet, God will give enough time for the sinner to repent, but repent the sinner must. I really enjoyed cigarettes before i got saved but my life must change, its not always easy but its always for the better. A woman may love a woman but when you have to add toys to give what the man has you can see that it is not gods best intention for holiness and spirituality.
              just sayin  smile

              1. Friendlyword profile image60
                Friendlywordposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                "Societies used to be a fairly good indicator of what god pretty much basically wants, although you could argue that but some of what i just said applies"

                SLAVERY AND JIM CROW WERE A PART OF AMERICAN SOCIETY. EXTERMINATION WAS A PART OF THE GERMAN SOCIETY...need I go on?

                1. hanging out profile image61
                  hanging outposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  no.. but you might want to research what life was like back in the 50's. Sure mankind has always sinned, thats not what im talking about..
                  the spirit of the world was much nicer in the 50's in america. In fact the spirit of the world is always changing and from continent to continent. By spirit i mean attitude. People in new york smiled and said hi, in canada until the 90's everybody was so busy saying hi on the streets as passerbys it was actually quite noisy. People went to church in higher percentages, the lords prayer was in schools, the attitude of one for all and all for me was not popular.. Slavery was abolished but then the price for everything doubled lol. Still the community was church based and smiles were abundant.

              2. 0
                dracaslairposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                some women make that choice to be with another woman.because, of bad and abusive men.i gave up on men because im tired of getting hurt or abused by a MAN.got real love when i got with a woman.

      2. 60
        meghancsmithnjposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        the bible was written by man...man, not actually God...

        1. christian107 profile image84
          christian107posted 3 years ago in reply to this

          written by man, inspired by God

          2 Peter 1: 16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.

          1. 0
            Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Inspired by God does not mean coming from God. Perhaps that inspiration was born from an idea of a power that should be feared so much that his works have been exaggerated.

      3. Seafarer Mama profile image88
        Seafarer Mamaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        But  Jesus' death and ressurrection brought a new law of love and forgiveness with it. He said "Love your Neighbor" and did not mention any exceptions to that!

    2. 0
      SirDentposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Why start a thread knowing it will cause many to be offended? If God says something is an abomination, it is an abomination. What was wrong in the beginning is still wrong today. It is just how things are.

      Now after all this, Jesus died for homosexuals also. No one was left out when He gave His life on the cross for the sins of the world.

      1. Maddie Ruud profile image82
        Maddie Ruudposted 6 years ago in reply to this



        Do you abstain from pork?  Do you refuse to touch your wife when she's menstruating?

        1. 0
          SirDentposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Fort one thing, I am not Jewish. I actually never was Jewish. This has nothing to do with eating pork and women menstruating. it has to do with sin and sin alone. Like I said, Jesus dies for all sinners, not just a few. All have sinned etc. . .

          1. Maddie Ruud profile image82
            Maddie Ruudposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Most of the references that can be interpreted as calling homosexuality an abomination are in the Old Testament, along with a lot of other arbitrary rules about what's clean and unclean, including the two examples above.  You're just picking and choosing what you think applies and what you think doesn't.

            1. 0
              SirDentposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I only know what I know. Some things were worse than others. Some sins required death while others required cleansing. If something is wrong, it is wrong. No one can change that.

              Like I said in my first comment, "Why start a thread knwoing many will be offended." I am done here.

              1. Maddie Ruud profile image82
                Maddie Ruudposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                But you can't know, not according to your own [Christian] beliefs.  Only God can.  And if that's so, then you have to either 1) take the Bible as literal truth or 2) decide that you don't know, and leave all the judging to God (which, by the way, it does tell you to do in the Bible itself).

                1. CodyPhrenism profile image75
                  CodyPhrenismposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Beautifully said, regardless of whether it is a sin in God's eyes it isn't our place to judge.

                  You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye. - Matthew 7:5

                  1. Obscurely Diverse profile image60
                    Obscurely Diverseposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    As I gleam optimism, I can't help but say:  God needs to revamp the systematic nature of things; perhaps get his ass down here and regulate upon thee...  Ha-ha!  Okay, if I was God, I would simply be using y'all retards as entertainment and I'd be laughing my ass off...  LOL!  Oh no, what have I created...  LMAO!   Okay-okay, ...oh nevermind, I can't do it... ha-ha!  Hopefully, we are all apart of the "creation" or else, someone is using us as one hell of a funny source of entertainment.  Who knows, maybe the satellite is via the moon for the aliens that view "Earth people" as a galactic "reality show."   Personally, I think the Bible is elementary; existence is way more complicated than tyrannical bastardized laws...perhaps?

                2. christian107 profile image84
                  christian107posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Maddy Ruud: your right. as a Christian we are not to judge. What is our duty is to tell the truth and after we're done we give that person the choice while here on earth. But after the person dies, if he continued to sin and did not have a personal relationship with Jesus Christ, then it will be too late come judgment time and God will remove that person from His kingdom and into hell

              2. Seafarer Mama profile image88
                Seafarer Mamaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                How do you know what is wrong?  I do not think God sees homosexuality is evil. True evil is in how cruel humans can be toward one another, either physically or emotionally, or both.

            2. 0
              Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              New Testament too.
              Romans 1: 26-32.
              Jude 7.

              1. Maddie Ruud profile image82
                Maddie Ruudposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Okay, and there are also ridiculous verses in the New Testament about how women shouldn't wear braided hair or gold jewelry.  Whatcha think about that?

                1. 0
                  Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I think that when Jesus came to this earth, He revealed the Spiritual Law, giving mankind the chance to get out from under the letter of the Law, which kills.
                  And He told us that there is no longer condemnation to those who are in His good graces.  That freedom from condemnation requires repentance.

                  1. Maddie Ruud profile image82
                    Maddie Ruudposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    I fail to see how this counters (or follows from) what I said, unless you're saying you think that women are only going to heaven if they repent braiding their hair?

                  2. Tumbletree profile image60
                    Tumbletreeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Repentance? Spiritual law? His good graces? Jesus didn't say anything like that. Read the bible and stop having others read and interpret it for you. Jesus said, "Love thy neighbor as thyself." Being rich was the sin he spoke most often against. Perhaps, Jesus would have considered homosexuality a sin, but if he did, he would be wrong.

                  3. Seafarer Mama profile image88
                    Seafarer Mamaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Might I add Repentance meaning for things done wrong, not for what one IS.

                2. christian107 profile image84
                  christian107posted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Maddie Ruud: jewelry and braided hair were used for pagan worship. But let me ask you: what is your real purpose anyway if you want a different hairstyle or jewelries in your body? is it to get much notice from other people? and if that's the case, aren't you satisfied on who you are as a person instead of replacing it with jewelries and hairstyles?

          2. qwark profile image60
            qwarkposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Dent:
            Oooopps!
            I almost forgot that I promised myself not to stoop to responding to your level of ignorant, primitive religious absurdity.
            BACK OFF QWARK!...:-(

        2. Greek One profile image80
          Greek Oneposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          No, but I refuse to call my wife a porky when she is menstruating because she would circumcised me with a weed whacker

        3. TheGlassSpider profile image81
          TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Maddie, you're so much more concise than I am lol

        4. Ron Montgomery profile image60
          Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Oh crap!  I was eating mu shu pork last night when my wife announced Aunt Flo's arrival.  Am I going to hell?

        5. spiderpam profile image58
          spiderpamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Leviticus was written to those people at that time. They were surrounded by pagan people who ate pork(uncooked and unsanitary) engage in homosexual behavior, bestiality and offering(killing) babies as sacrifices to the sun god. So God commanded His people not to do as the pagans did.
          In fact, some of best medical facts are listed in Leviticus that science just figured out in the past 200 years. For example  Blood is the source of health and life/(Leviticus 17:11), When dealing with disease, hands should be washed under running water (Leviticus 15:13).

          As for the New testament reference to hair braiding, context must be applied, The bible clearly states women should not focus so much on the physical(looks and appearance), but focus on God.

          Finally the "do not judge" mantra. Again context needs to be applied Jesus never says Do not judge, He simply tells Christians how to judge, according to His laws not our own. Please don't take my word for it look it up for yourself.

          “After many years of intense research, a genetic component to homosexual desires has not been discovered. Twin studies show that identical twins do not consistently have the same sexual orientation. In fact, genetics probably explains very little about homosexual desires. How would a homosexual “gene” be passed on? Homosexuals don’t pass on anything because they don’t reproduce. The human genome project found no such gene. Then figure out how such a destructive and non productive gene would survive through thousands of generations. Second, the “born-that-way” claim is an argument from design” since God designed me with these desires, I ought to act on them.” But the people who say this overlook something more obvious they were also born with a specific gender. This raises the question: Why are you following your desires but not your gender? After all, we’re not sure if your desires were designed or the result of your upbringing, but we are certain that your anatomy is designed. So why not follow your anatomy rather than your desires? Ignoring your desires may be uncomfortable, but ignoring the natural design of your body is often fatal.
          Even IF desires are not a choice, sexual behavior always is. So even if a person honestly believes that he’s been born with homosexual desires, he is certainly capable of controlling his sexual behavior. If you claim that he is not—that sexual behavior is somehow uncontrollable—then you have made the absurd contention that no one can be morally responsible for any sexual crime, including rape, incest, and child molestation.” "IF you are born with a genetic predisposition to alcohol, does that mean God wants you to be an alcoholic? If someone has a genetic attraction to children, does that mean God wants you to be a pedophile? (According to pedophiles it does!) What homosexual activist would say that a genetic predisposition to anger justifies gay-bashing? (Born gay? What if the gay basher was born mean?) " Frank Turek

          Homosexuality is wrong true, but so is stealing, lying, and adultery and anyone who commits any of these sins and is unrepentant will go to hell. That’s why Jesus came and died because we are all broken sinners in need of a Saviour. Repent and trust in Jesus Christ alone and he will heal you inside and out. I am a witness to this.

          1. Mark Knowles profile image60
            Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            "Why do Christians have a problem with Homosexuals?"

            Because they are judgmental hypocrites with no moral code who gain a false sense of personal power from attacking other people who are different.

            They have given up all real personal power to the invisible super Daddy in the sky. Now they can spend their energy attacking others instead of dealing with their internal inadequacies.

            They have no morals. None. sad

            1. Diane Inside profile image87
              Diane Insideposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              You are generalizing a whole group of people, Thats like saying all muslims are terrorists. It feels to me like you are attacking people who are different from you.

              1. jlpark profile image91
                jlparkposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Diane - so are many Christians when they talk about the 'abomination' of homosexuality, and homosexuals.

                Suddenly, it hurts the 'other side' and they cry foul, yet refuse to stop doing the SAME thing? Hypocrisy at it's finest really.

                As a gay woman, I've never generalised about a religion - I take people as they come - if you come to me and go at me about your religion saying I am wrong, I will come back at you..and solely you, and your interpretation of religion.  Yet, many people who've come at me (HP mostly!) have generalised gays and lesbians as a group.

            2. christian107 profile image84
              christian107posted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Mark Knowles: what you just said is a HATE filled statement. Second, you just judged a group of people without giving some accounts of what you just stated

              1. Zelkiiro profile image85
                Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Christians: "Gays are evil! Death to gays! They are an abomination and should be purged! They're all evil and they all rape children!"
                Nonbelievers: "You're joking, right? Do you honestly believe that crap?"
                Christians: "THAT'S A HATE-FILLED STATEMENT STOP JUDGING YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO JUDGE"

                1. 0
                  Brenda Durhamposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  That's not a correct representation of Christianity.   Nope, not even the Christians here and elsewhere who totally disagree with the Christians here who keep siding with the liberals.  So please stop posting such accusatory remarks.

          2. Friendlyword profile image60
            Friendlywordposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            How digusting it is for some people to act like they're intelligent and  educated and that it relates to their hold on reality in any way, or that they have any sense of morality or decency or propriety. Using what little sense you can muster; answer the question you yourself bought up. How could GOD allow Man, Woman, and every other type of Mammal, animal and bird and insect to engage in a sexual act that is not natural and right. Are you saying that the birds and bees are sinners and need to repent and come to Jesus?

            Stop pretending your reasoning comes from anything other than ignorant, stupid, evil hate. I'm not impressed.

            1. spiderpam profile image58
              spiderpamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              @-Mark- You committed the common strawman of God which easy to blow down so I guess you win. How do account for morals from purely materialistic worldview? How do you justify it. If it's all a matter of opinion why are you here and how can honestly say you're right when history, facts, and common sense go against your opinion.

              @- FW The ad hominem fallacy you've committed is typical, but I'll work around it. We have free will and can use it to obey God's law(repent and trust) or ignore it(do whatever you want), but ignoring God's law has consequences earthly and eternal. God created us separate from the animals, animals are not moral beings they do no have a conscience. If you have to look down in the animals kingdom from an example on how to live your life that's a problem because eat their young and their own poop. The end of your rant consist of argument by emotive language, you're unable the deal with my arguments so unleash harsh words to appeal to the emotion, not logic(sounds like conviction to me) You stated "I'm not impressed", well I'm not surprised. sad

              1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I did no such thing. This is what I said and you are living proof.


                As to your question - easy - morals are something we come to by consensus that allow us to live harmoniously with our neighbors. Morals are adaptable; flexible to suit the situation. They are not written in stone. wink What was moral yesterday is not necessarily so today.

                Are you saying that people cannot follow a moral code without pretending there is an invisible super Daddy in the sky?

                Because I do not see believers behaving any better than non-believers.

                1. spiderpam profile image58
                  spiderpamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Oh yes you did, and you do it all the time. Definition of stawman-attacking an exaggerated or caricatured version of your opponent's position or belief
                  “sky daddy” “invisible super Daddy in the sky,”  “sky fairy,” “magic man in the sky,” so yes all of your best "arguments" fall under one BIG fallacy. sad

                  “morals are something we come to by consensus”

                  Oh okay there are people who by consensus agree that eating their enemies after killing them is moral and right, does that make it right?

                  In parts of the world people believe you must cut off a 10 year old boy privates in order to have a great harvest. Is that moral?

                  “Morals are adaptable; flexible to suit the situation. They are not written in stone. What was moral yesterday is not necessarily so today.”

                  You’ve committed another fallacy here called reifying. Your abstract thinking here is nowhere near concrete. You supplied no evidence or realistic examples that state there are no objective morals, you’ve simply stated morals adapt, which is nowhere based in law, practice, or reality. Your abstract and imaginary ideas looses ground when someone you love is senselessly murdered or someone steals something you worked very hard to earn.

                  “Are you saying that people cannot follow a moral code without pretending there is an invisible super Daddy in the sky?”

                  More straw and no I’m not saying you can’t be moral without God, of course you can. In fact that’s exactly what we would expect if the God of the bible were the One True God. Hebrews 8 “I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts:”, but the atheist can’t justify their moral behavior it’s not consistent with their materialistic worldview.


                  As for your final remark, according to the study conducted by the Barna Group

                  “Christians are far more likely than atheists to be part of groups that work hard to instill values about being good to other people, and having good relationships. The teachings of the Bible emphasize values such as honesty, love, forgiveness, sexual fidelity, patience, and generosity. In addition, all Christian denominations strongly discourage negative behaviors, such as fornication, profanity, gambling, gossiping, retaliation, drunkenness, and lying. Many of these values are not emphasized in social circles dominated by atheists. In theory, atheists can lead moral lives, the absence of an absolute moral foundation probably leads to moral drifting over time. This phenomenon also occurs in Christians who abandon church and Christian fellowship. As a result, the differences in morality between atheists and evangelicals is striking, with atheists being much more prone to viewing pornography, using profanity in public, gossiping, and drunkenness. For the 8 sins surveyed in the Barna study, atheists were nearly 5 times more likely to commit those sins than evangelical Christians. In addition, atheists are much less likely to donate to charities (even secular ones) and perform volunteer services in their communities compared with religious people. So, even though atheists can lead a moral life, on average, they don't measure up. Although it is possible that atheism is not the cause of moral failure, it seems unlikely that there are genetic or other demographic factors that account for the differences in behavior.”

                  Source: Young Adults and Liberals Struggle with Morality a study conducted by The Barna Group

                  I gotta run, it's Saturday lol

                  1. 60
                    (Q)posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    You are confusing bad ideologies with morals. It is the bad ideologies, like religions, that drive people to commit those atrocities. They have been indoctrinated into a belief system and have lost all sense of morals as a result.



                    Helping mankind and humanity never changes. Bad ideologies change, though.

              2. Friendlyword profile image60
                Friendlywordposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                It took me a day to look up your Ad Hominem. Very slippery of you clar...Spiderpam.

                I’m not impressed because I’ve lived long enough to see and hear people like you that are educated and very good with words, you can move the crowd, but,  deluded enough to think you’re clever just because you can twist words enough to influence enough people to commit murder for you.- (DAVID KORESH, JIM  JONES, JERRY FALWELL DAVID DUKES) -They all had your “gift”.
                And in the end that’s all you want to do.  You’re no different than false Muslim terrorist trying to climb up to heaven on the bodies of murdered innocent people.   
                “We have free will and can use it to obey God's law(repent and trust) or ignore it(do whatever you want), but ignoring God's law has consequences earthly and eternal“.

                You make up lies and call it RESEARCH!
                “After many years of intense research, a genetic component to homosexual desires has not been discovered.”

                I’m not impressed because you ignore facts instead of addressing them.  You twist facts to keep from addressing them:
                “Even IF desires are not a choice, sexual behavior always is. So even if a person honestly believes that he’s been born with homosexual desires, he is certainly capable of controlling his sexual behavior.”

                You put words in peoples mouths and make ridiculous replies after you have bared false witness against them:
                “If you claim that he is not—that sexual behavior is somehow uncontrollable—then you have made the absurd contention that no one can be morally responsible for any sexual crime, including rape, incest, and child molestation.” "IF you are born with a genetic predisposition to alcohol, does that mean God wants you to be an alcoholic? If someone has a genetic attraction to children, does that mean God wants you to be a pedophile? (According to pedophiles it does!) What homosexual activist would say that a genetic predisposition to anger justifies gay-bashing? (Born gay? What if the gay basher was born mean?) " Frank Turek”

                Just Crazy! Since hetero and homosexual people have been on earth having each others straight and homosexual babies since the beginning of time:
                “Homosexuals don’t pass on anything because they don’t reproduce. The human genome project found no such gene.”


                So with  my 9th Grade Education, I read through all of your comments and I’m just not impressed.  I heard them all too many times from people that proved they had GOD nowhere in them. Their only desire being,  to move the crowd.

                PS: Don’t worry; I wont die from blue balls or whatever you had in mind. I use every part of my anatomy and I thank GOD for them. Wish I had more parts to use:
                “So why not follow your anatomy rather than your desires? Ignoring your desires may be uncomfortable, but ignoring the natural design of your body is often fatal”

      2. TheGlassSpider profile image81
        TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Because she can.

        And because it's a valid question.

        If Christians know that Christ died on the cross for everyone's sins, then why do so many of them preach hatred, judgment, and fear...Even though they ought to know better? Why do so many Christians focus on the fact that homosexuality is an abomination, but not that eating shellfish, mixing different threads, or touching dead pigskin (i.e., footballs) is also an abomination? Why don't I hear more Christians proclaiming the law of love instead of talking about how hateful the things WE HUMANS do are in the sight of God. We ALL fall short of the glory of God...so why do so many feel the need to pick on one group for their PARTICULAR downfall?

        Why does it offend you that someone wants to talk about a major problem that is obvious in the world?

        Shouldn't we be able to discuss these things? What if I wanted to start a thread about why so many white people hate black people? Yes, it might offend someone, even though that wouldn't be my intention--but at least I would be asking a legitimate question and talking about a problem that does occur in the world. People need to stop getting so defensive about things and be willing to talk about them even if they're difficult.

        ETA: BTW, I am both white and a believer in Christ. Go figure.

        1. Greek One profile image80
          Greek Oneposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          but if 10 per cent of people are gay, a lot more eat pork

        2. Mamelody profile image61
          Mamelodyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          aww Spider I think I've just fallen in love with you.. Thanks for standing up for me.. definitely Big Boobie Huggs for you tongue tongue

          1. TheGlassSpider profile image81
            TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Ooooh!!! *revels in her Big Boobie Hug* Goodness, it's not often one gets pampered with such a nice pair of boobies! big_smile

    3. 0
      Justine76posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      are you a christian?
      if not, why do you care?

    4. jim62367 profile image61
      jim62367posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Going back to when Homosexuality began, it goes back WAAAAAAAYYYYYY prior to even the existence of Christianity.  Greek & Roman days, long before Christianity came about.  Alexander the Great comes to mind.  Christianity came about and they DECIDED what behavior that was going on at the time was acceptable and what was not.  Just like they have done to other beleif systems and religions.  If they do not like something, they go over and try to "convert" it to their belief structure.  And if they can't, they destroy it.  It's a matter of historical fact.  Not to mention how many ministers and preists and rabi's are gay child molesters.  And what does it matter anyway?  According to their beleifs, God will forgive you for anything, all you need do is ask.  If God will forgive a child rapist/murderer, I am sure he will forgive 2 consenting adults for their consensual homosexual activities.

    5. 60
      ExposingCriminalsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Deleted

      1. Bacall profile image59
        Bacallposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        "But I care for homosexuals too much to endorse medically dangerous behavior. I help them leave homosexuality if they want and many do through the healing power of Jesus Christ."

        I had to laugh out loud!  After all you high minded preaching!  You turn out to be a cheap snake oil salesmen.

        What a joke!!!

    6. Apostle Jack profile image60
      Apostle Jackposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      The bible speak aganist GAY UNIONS.I agree with the bible.
      God created male and female.Not adam,and steve,,nor
      eve and luease.We live by choice.

      1. earnestshub profile image87
        earnestshubposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        The bible was written by a bunch of ignorant goat herders from stories that came thousands of years before. Homophobic goat herders at that!

        1. 0
          Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          lol There's a disgruntled anti Semite. Appreciate the racism??? Good job!

          1. Bacall profile image59
            Bacallposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            I don't know from goat herders and anti-semites. But I do know that stories of Jesus Christ and the Crucifixtion are painted on the walls of Egyptian and Mayan ruins.

            http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid … 743189197#

          2. earnestshub profile image87
            earnestshubposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Are you calling me a racist on the basis of your biblical interpretations?
            You just know what you can do with that! lol

            1. 0
              Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              lol
              i heart former religionists !

        2. christian107 profile image84
          christian107posted 3 years ago in reply to this

          earnestshub: your a BIBLIOPHOBIC goatherder.

          1. 0
            Motown2Chitownposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            I recognize that you are new to the HP community.  Please refrain from personal attacks in the forums, as it is against the TOS. 

            Also, Ernest (earnestshub) was a much loved member of this community.  He died several months ago.  Be prepared that you may receive a great deal of backlash for this remark.

            1. Uninvited Writer profile image82
              Uninvited Writerposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Probably won't make a difference. One of our good Christians on HubPages said some nasty things about him after it was announced he had died.

              1. 61
                whoisitposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Doesn't sound like a good christian to me.

                1. Zelkiiro profile image85
                  Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  Sounds like your average everyday Christian to me.

                2. wilderness profile image96
                  wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  And in addition, there is little doubt that Earnest knew far more about the bible than he does.  Perhaps he could gain his own inspiration by reading Earnest's hubs.

              2. 0
                Brenda Durhamposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                Uninvited Writer,  I was around here to witness those remarks to which you refer.   At least, I do believe I saw EACH post about that.   And the person you're referring to did NOT to my knowledge post anything  "nasty" about Earnest at all;   I do remember him simply saying something truthful.   I recall how he was harrassed because he spoke that truth, but I refrained from getting into that argument at the time out of respect for Earnest having passed so recently then.

                Are you trying to insult the character of that person on the basis of the same posts I myself saw?   If so, that's not right at all.   To be honest,  it would be good if you guys would stop using Earnest's name to further your idea that Christians are so bad,  when in fact we all know that Earnest posted many outright anti-Christian things and was quite often very rude toward Christians here, to say the least.

                   Now, he's gone, and I respect that and I have never said anything even negative about him since then (until now, if you want to count my truthful statement above).   Me and some other Christians posted well-wishes to his memory and his family, as a matter of fact,  out of respect for him as a person.   But indeed it is not wrong to speak the truth even if it is negative, especially when it's common knowledge that was witnessed here in black and white on this very site.

                Also, I will point out that the new hubber who responded to a post of Earnest's probably had no way of knowing that he had passed away, since his profile and all is still here,  and that in any event that poster didn't say anything any worse than the post of Earnest's that he/she responded to.

                I didn't even want to get involved in this thread,  but since people revived it,  it's not right for hubbers to let it be used as a vehicle to insult and semi-threaten newbies.  Or any other Christian, for that matter.
                Not saying that you, UW,  "threatened" anybody.   But another poster's words do border on that, bigtime.

                I'm pretty sure that if the newbie had been a liberal who came in spouting anti-Christian stuff, you guys would've welcomed him/her with open arms and several BRAVOs.

                I'm equally quite sure that if a Christian had jumped in here first and warned everybody about how liberal and anti-Christian Earnest was, or how anti-Christian Mark is (openly),  you and a few others would've been all over them, telling them to let the man rest in peace and perhaps to not insult the other much-admired hubber as well.   I think that's what you all should do now-------let Earnest's name rest and stop using it to insult Christians.

            2. wilderness profile image96
              wildernessposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Would you say that Earnest left a far more lasting, and positive, mark on this site that he could ever hope to?

              I sure would.

              1. 0
                Motown2Chitownposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                I'd say that Ernest did indeed leave a VERY positive mark on this community and on many of the folks who met him here.

                smile

      2. Bacall profile image59
        Bacallposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        "I agree with the bible.
        God created male and female.Not adam,and steve,,nor
        eve and luease.We live by choice."

        If you agree with the Bible; then you know that God created Adam and Steve first. They were running around and rolling around in that garden for(what could have been)millions of years before Eve and "Luease" came along. That is if you believe in the Bible version of Creation.

      3. 0
        Deborah Sextonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Only Apostle Paul taught this. But Apostle Paul was put there to test God's people

        1. aguasilver profile image87
          aguasilverposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          You mean the Jews I presume?.... I can see that established in scripture, what with Paul, being a high ranking former Jewish religious buff, turning to accept the Messiah as Christ would have tested them a bit....

          I can see why the Pharisees may have wanted to discredit him, he was a kinda high level defector from their 'camp'

          1. 0
            Deborah Sextonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            ***********************************************
            The Twelve Apostles Discredited him. There were only 12 not 13. One for every one of the Twelve Tribes.
            What Yahshua said was completely different from what Paul said.
            He said He was Jew, A roman citizen. They thought by looking at him that he was Egyptian. He said he was a Gentile,
            He said he lied for God. He told the people he guiled them.
            He taught the law had been abolished when Christ died . He changed Yahshua Messiah to Jesus Christ. He said all things were lawful. He said he was equal to the son of God. I could go on and on.

            There were many Gentiles that discredited him.
            All of his followers left him

            1. aguasilver profile image87
              aguasilverposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              So let me get this clear...

              You are stating that ALL of the Pauline books are antichrist, that Paul was a counterfeit, and that therefore we need to discount and discard ALL of the Pauline (or Paul influenced books in the new covenant.

              Is that correct?

              Paul never had the road to Damascus experience...
              He did not need to be crucified upside down in Rome....
              He could have avoided the beatings, shipwreck and hardship...

              He was NOT under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and responsible for spreading the word to the Gentiles, he was in effect, a counterfeit under the control of Satan, deliberately leading people AWAY from Jesus and towards a false messiah of Pauls own creation....

              Is that what you are saying?

              1. 0
                Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                john, I posted a rebuttal to her, which she ignored completely in another thread about how he was trained by the highest, most respected rabbi, Gamaliel: president of the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem! Teacher of Saul, etc. So, she got some new age seed that took root against him -and him alone- for some reason.

                1. 0
                  Deborah Sextonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I'm not new age. although most new age is steeped in ancient days.I've told you that before, you're saying it to harass. Mighty Pauline of you.

                  I have always known Paul was a false Apostle since about 17 ears old

                  Judas Iscariot was taught by the best, Yahshua. He still fulfilled the prophecy he was meant to fulfill

                  You didn't have to teach me about Gamaliel, I already knew. I've studied the Bible. If you tried to talk about it before? I didn't see it because of your insults and put downs.

                  It's nice to follow the Pauline doctrine. Do anything you want and you're still saved.

                  Forget the words and laws of God, Pauline is much more believable,
                  right? Cause he agrees with the way you want to live, right?

                  1. 0
                    Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    I have asked you ten times and the only thing you throw back are silly sound bites. Any one can take two lines of old-new and call it A HA! So, again give us EXACT proof -from Peter, James, John, Jesus that this socialite turned believer was 'the anti-christ' and perhaps we might consider it.

                    You remember the posting, yes?
                    I showed a reply to all the points, you evaded AS ALWAYS, to hold on to your ways of thinking. Of course you would dispute Paul, since he powerfully spoke out against exactly what you practice: astrology, self-empowerment, tarot divination, false teachings on entrance to the Kingdom Of Heaven, bent version of true faith, shackles of law mixed with 'enlightened liberation' -a cumulostratus cloud without a drop of refreshing rain to ease the burdens of any. And like the Christians you verbally slither between each line and chapter from a book that is NOT the word incarnate. With the same split tongue you claim Y`shua is Lord. That has to be the most perfect blend of ba`al worship and mentality I believe have ever seen or read...

              2. 0
                Deborah Sextonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                1. Yes-first paragraph

                2. Paul told three different stories about his conversion. And used words from the stories of Bacchus. "Kick against the Prick" to describe what happened. Yahshua would not have used Dionysus to relay his message.
                Yes he had to be crucified. God did not allow him to go any further...Yes

                3. God told the real prophets to separate from him. He was ordained to carry out the prophecy of Balaam.
                * my note * Just like Judas had to carry out the prophecy.

                4. Peter was the Apostle to carry the Gospel to the Gentile but Paul took over. Acts 10:1-48 and Acts 11:1-18
                Yes in control of Satan, a fake, a false Apostle Read my Hun Apostle Paul the Deceiver Teaches a new Gospel and Apostle Paul the Deceiver and the Number 666
                Acts 26:9
                I verily thought with myself, that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth.

                Acts 13:1-2
                There were some prophets who came to Antioch and as they were fasting and praying the Holy Ghost told them to separate Barnabas and Paul, from the church, so they could do the work God had called them for.
                1 John 2:19
                19. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

                Yes the Holy Ghost-to lead him away. To do his mission. To deceive and test those i  the true word.



                That is what I'm  saying?
                Study it.

                He called Christ cursed

                Read the crazy stuff he wrote in Romans 7

                1. lucieanne profile image81
                  lucieanneposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I've just read this entire thread with much interest (and mirth) and just had to add my two-penny worth to the debate. I was brought up in the Christian faith, and believed everything I was taught at sunday-school, and later, in church. That is, until I woke up and smelled the coffee. We are all entitled to our opinions, that's why we were 'given' free will.
                  The Catholic church is the most corrupt in the entire world. They are nothing but a bunch of hippocrites. On the one hand they say homosexuality is a sin, yet it's okay for all these bent preists to interfere with little boys and destroy their innocence. How does that work then? What was it Jesus allegedly said - 'suffer little children?' Well they certainly took that part literally! The bible is nothing more than a fairy-tale that has caused more deaths and wars than anything else in the entire history of the human race. Is this how 'God' intended it to be for us? we are led to believe that the God of the bible is an all-loving, all-forgiving God, but to quote some scripture (badly) 'God was angry and caused a plague to smite his people.'  I get angry with my kids, but I don't kill them just because they've done something I don't like.
                  I don't understand homosexuality. I can't get my head round why they want to get it on with someone of their own sex . No other animals do it (I don't think) We were put on the planet to procreate and it's never going to happen with two men or two women. But  I've got quite a few 'gay' friends. Does this mean I'm guilty by association? Am I going to burn in the fires of hell for all eternity just because my mate chooses to sleep with another man and not me? I think where people go wrong is by taking the bible literally. Yeah, I know- 'All scripture is inspired by God and beneficial for teaching' . Timothy something or other, or was it Paul? But come on - Jonah and the whale? Please don't insult my intelligence! Blind faith cannot be a good thing. We tell our youngsters there's a Santa Claus (deliberately lie to them) and then have to tell them 'Sorry kid, we made it up.'  Why? And for everyone who is so happy to quote chapter and verse, isn't lying a sin? The bible cannot be taken literally. Where are all the 'miracles' these days? If a woman stepped forward today and said she had got herself pregnant by a ghost, no-one would say 'Ooh it must be an immaculate conception.' It's just not possible. Why should things have been so different back then than they are today?
                  Having said all that, I do believe Jesus was a real life flesh and blood human being, who had a vision for a better life for all of us. (today he would be called a radical) and I do believe there is a divine entity who created the universe and everything in it. God doesn't condemn homosexuality, people do, because they don't understand it. We are slowly evolving out of the 'race' issue, -some quicker than others- Wasn't that the same thing? God isn't racist, why should he be homophobic? He made us all didnt He?

                  1. Anita_Lumley profile image80
                    Anita_Lumleyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Actually, there are other creatures on this Earth, besides humans, that engage in homosexual acts. I did one google search and found an article from National Geographic that explains more.

                    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news … nimal.html

    7. James A Watkins profile image92
      James A Watkinsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I do not believe Christians have a problem with homosexuals, as your title implies. Christians have a problem with homosexual behavior and even more than that with the homosexual political movement.

      Christians were very quiet about homosexual behaviors in the 1960s and prior. What is happening now is not an aggressive action; it is a reaction to the actions of the homosexual movement. Christian beliefs and worldview are under demonic attack and it is the duty of the Christian to counteract this attack.

      There may not be many Muslims on HubPages but the view of Islam is even more severe about homosexual behaviors.

      Christians have a duty to condemn evil in their midst. But you are right that they also have a duty to love everybody regardless of their personal sins. This is why Christians are against adultery, fornication, and lying but not against adulterers, fornicators, and liars. It is sinful behaviors—not people—that Christians and God are against.

      I always hear this old "stuffing your views down our throats" argument, which is a false argument.  If we have opposing views why is it not YOU who is stuffing your views down my throat?

      I agree that there is no place for gay-bashing. But love is an action verb—not a feeling. If you love a person, or your community or nation, you do what is best for them and oppose what is vicious rather than virtuous.

      1. Mark Knowles profile image60
        Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Rubbish. Disingenuous nonsense that neglects to mention the fact that homosexual sex (sodomy) was illegal in the United States until the 1970/80s when all the laws the Right Wing Kristian Fascists had inserted into the secular law courts were repealed or invalidated.

        So - yes - Christians had a problem with homosexuality, were active against homosexuals and were vocal enough to have laws passed against homosexual activity in the past. No need to be vocal about it if you already had it made illegal is there?

        And let's face it - you guys were too busy fighting to keep segregation in the 1950/60s. wink

        Lying for Jesus huh?

        I thought that was a sin? Oh - that is right...

        Do as I say. Not as I do is one of them Christian values you cherish.

        Demonic attack? lol lol lol lol

        You do not know what is best for me.

        1. James A Watkins profile image92
          James A Watkinsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I think you are smart enough to know that Christians were the leaders of the civil rights movement in the 1950s and 1960s; and virtually all abolitionists were Christians. Sodomy laws go back at least 3,000 years, predating Christianity. Sodomy was illegal in pagan Rome except for a master sodomizing his slave. Sodomy has been illegal in nearly the entire world; and still is in 70 countries—most of which are not Christian countries.

          1. Jeff Berndt profile image90
            Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            "I think you are smart enough to know that Christians were the leaders of the civil rights movement in the 1950s and 1960s; and virtually all abolitionists were Christians."

            And I don't think you're disingenuous enough to deny that there were plenty of Christian leaders in strong opposition to the civil rights movement in the 50's and 60's, and virtually all anti-abolitionists were also Christians.

            1. jlpark profile image91
              jlparkposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Sodomy should be illegal - it's anal rape. Anal sex on the other hand is just that - anal sex

          2. Mark Knowles profile image60
            Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            None of which really addresses the point I have made that Christians were actively opposing homosexuals before 1960 and your statement is a lie: 


            But - lying for Jesus is OK right? If you are arguing for what you know is good fr me?

            1. James A Watkins profile image92
              James A Watkinsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              The lady who started this forum is questioning why she hears Christians voice opposition to homosexual behaviors as if Christian people were just sitting around one day bored and decided, "Hey, let's talk about homosexual behavior!"  You know better. Homosexual behavior was rarely discussed by churchgoing people, preachers, teachers, seminaries, Christian writers, or theologians, before the Homosexual Movement cranked up. The point is that Christians are now playing defense but the deceivers of the world like to pretend they are playing offense. There is a huge difference. Not that you would acknowledge it.

              1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Odd that you do not acknowledge the admonitions against homosexuality in the bible. Written 1800 years ago.

                Odd that you do not acknowledge the Christian influences on the secular laws against homosexuality.

                Odd that you do not remember Oscar Wilde, Dorian Grey, Walt Whitman.

                Odd that you choose to ignore the murder of accused homosexuals during the Inquisition.

                Sure - Christians have only started to speak against homosexuals recently. Dear me. sad

                No morals. None. That is the problem with your religion. It teaches you to lie to defend the faith regardless. Liars for Jesus. Sad - no even worse - politics - is what this is.

                Bring back the good old days when Christians never said a word against homosexuals because they had managed to make it illegal huh?

                I mean - are you genuinely ignorant of the history of abuse against homosexuals by people who hold your values dear?

                Are you really that ignorant?

                1. James A Watkins profile image92
                  James A Watkinsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Get back to me when you learn to read; or comprehend what you read.

                  1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                    Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Ah - insults. Yup you are a real Christian. Not sure what exactly I did not comprehend about this particular statement:



                    Sorry I have shown it to be untrue. Still - you keep on pretending it is. lol

                    ciao

              2. livelonger profile image89
                livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                James,

                Why are Christians silent about divorce? Why do they allow it to be legal? Why aren't they pressing for its ban, like they do for same-sex marriage?

                As you know, Christ explicitly condemned divorce several times in the New Testament (despite never mentioning same-sex relationships once).

                1. Jeff Berndt profile image90
                  Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  "Why are Christians silent about divorce? Why do they allow it to be legal? Why aren't they pressing for its ban, like they do for same-sex marriage?"

                  To be fair, Christians aren't exactly silent about it, they're just not pushing for its recriminalization.

                  Why? Because a lot of people get divorced. They'd have a lot fewer allies and a lot more foes if they started agitating for a prohibition on divorce.

                  Plus, lots of Christians get divorced.

                  Gay people only make up somewhere between 3% and 10% of the entire population, depending whose numbers you believe. Divorced people make up a much larger percentage. Picking on gay people is a lot safer, plus it lets them feel superior. Kinda like the 5th grader who picks on 3rd graders.

                  1. livelonger profile image89
                    livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Yes, you're right. It's easy to feel righteous about sins you'll never commit, right?

                    Not that, of course, that the Dominionists will agree to that. They usually dance around the whole question, ignore it, or put up nonsense answers like Spiderpam has.

                2. spiderpam profile image58
                  spiderpamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Deleted

                  1. livelonger profile image89
                    livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    I'm not saying Jesus Christ accepted homosexuality. I said that he explicitly condemned divorce 5 times, but the evangelical Christians are more likely to put their full weight behind banning gay marriage and NO weight behind banning divorce, which Jesus condemned in no uncertain terms.

                    The reason? These evangelicals are hypocrites (yet another thing that Jesus condemned). They might want to get a divorce, or they know/love someone who got a divorce, so they're not going to press to make it illegal. As for gays? The only gay people they know are sick caricatures, so working to make them second-class citizens under the law is righteousness on the cheap.

      2. getitrite profile image80
        getitriteposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        When you state "demonic attack" are you implying that there are entities such as demons?

        If so, could you describe a demon in an intelligent way, to a postmodern intellectual audience?

        1. James A Watkins profile image92
          James A Watkinsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Demons are spiritual (non-physical) beings that are hostile to both God and man. Their minds are permanently opposed to the honor of God and the welfare of human beings.  Their prince is Satan. Demons are particularly active on the frontier of God's Kingdom—where the Gospel is being effectively spread—and in lands where the Gospel is losing ground—once Christian lands where faith in God is on the wane.  Demonic activity is the supernatural working on the minds of men in order to persuade them to oppose God and virtue in general.

          1. Jeff Berndt profile image90
            Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            "Demonic activity is the supernatural working on the minds of men in order to persuade them to oppose God and virtue in general."

            Wow, that's convenient.

            There are these invisible things called demons, and their job is to influence men's minds so that they'll work against God. You can't see them, hear them, or measure them in any way, but they're there. Without demons, everyone would be able to see the Truth for what it is. Since there are demons, and their job is to hide the Truth from men's eyes, only those without demons can see the Truth.

            You can't see demons, only their effects on people; that is, in people's lack of faith in God, and in their speech and actions against God's earthly servants (like me!)

            I am on God's side, therefore, demons are working against me, too.
            But I'm immune to demons' Truth-obscuring ability, because I'm on God's side.

            Therefore, anyone who speaks against me is being influenced by an intangible demon, is not thinking for himself, is working to promote evil in the world, and is God's enemy.

            The only actual evidence of these assertions is the fact that the person in question disagrees with me, so that's how you can tell if someone is under demonic control: they disagree with me.

            Other people may claim to be on God's side, but you can tell whether they are or not by checking to see if they agree with me or not. If they agree, they're really a servant of God. If they disagree, they're only pretending to serve God, and are serving demons instead.


            Wow, this is brilliant: it requires no actual evidence, and it cannot be disproven!

            Too bad there are so many people making the same claim and disagreeing the hell out of each other.

            1. James A Watkins profile image92
              James A Watkinsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Do you believe you have a subconcious mind? Can you see it? How do you know it is there? Wouldn't the greatest trick of all be for demons to convince you that they don't exist? Then you can blame your sins on your animal nature—since it is all you have. How convenient. Can't help our animal impulses, right?

              1. Jeff Berndt profile image90
                Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                "Do you believe you have a subconcious mind? Can you see it? How do you know it is there?"
                Dunno, maybe it's there, maybe it's not. Sometimes I have a hard time remembering a bit of trivia, and I can't remember for the life of me. But then, for some reason, I suddenly remember it, without having had to go and look it up. Subconscious mind at work? Maybe.
                Where do I get ideas from? Subconscious mind at work? Maybe. Whether I have a subconscious mind or not isn't really part of this debate, is it?

                Also, I'm not trying to use the theory of the subconscious mind to convince everyone that people who speak out against me are Evil and working to destroy Good.

                "Wouldn't the greatest trick of all be for demons to convince you that they don't exist?"
                No, it'd be a pretty darn easy trick for demons to convince people that demons don't exist; they can't be perceived, either directly or indirectly*.

                "Then you can blame your sins on your animal nature—since it is all you have. How convenient. Can't help our animal impulses, right?"
                We can't help our animal impulses, no, but we can decide whether or not to indulge them.

                For example, right now I could really go for a beer. Mmmm, beer, I can imagine how tasty and thirst-quenching a nice pilsener would be right now. But I'm not going to give in to that animal impulse because I'm going to have to drive soon.
                Also, I'm pretty hungry. But I'm not going to eat right now, because it'd spoil my dinner, which is also coming soon.

                I get mad sometimes, mostly when my kids misbehave. My animal impulse is to yell at them and maybe even spank them. But I choose not to do that. I choose to teach them that we can make good decisions not based on fear of punishment but because it's better in the long run to make good decisions.

                There aren't any demons telling me, "Oh, go have that beer, it'll be soooo gooooood, and who will it hurt, really?" That's my body, telling me that I'm thirsty and my brain thinking that since I enjoy the taste of beer, maybe I ought to go get one. But then there's also my brain saying, "Hang on, maybe a beer wouldn't be the best thing to drink just now."

                Of course, if it makes you feel better, you could imagine a little red cartoon of me on my left shoulder, waving a wee pitchfork and saying "Mmmmm, beeeeeer...." and another, white-robed cartoon of me on my right shoulder, carrying a wee harp (not the excellent lager from Ireland but the musical instrument), and saying, "Why don't you wait with that beer and have a glass of water instead."

                *Unless you count people's behavior and speech, which is very convenient: you can just chalk any behavior or speech with which you disagree to demonic influence.

                1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                  Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Why do you hate god so much? sad

                  1. Jeff Berndt profile image90
                    Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    I don't hate God. God is awesome!

                    It's only I can decide if having a beer right now is a good idea without His help.

      3. Beelzedad profile image60
        Beelzedadposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        That's why we're here. smile

    8. days leaper profile image48
      days leaperposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      No-one should be bashed for their sexuality.  But no-one should have other peoples preferences shoved in their face either.  In Christianity; even hetrosexual sex is most usually about pro creation of continuing life, not necessarily obsessively.  But people seem to put their own spin on things -even heterosexuals.  Much is said about restraint.  Homosexuality is a rejection of Christianity though, in it's very essence because it is impossible for two of the same sex to create new life -this should be obvious by now! (LOL.)

      1. A Troubled Man profile image60
        A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        Where does it say that Christianity is about creating new life?

        1. 0
          Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          Christianity isn't about creating new life.. I think the poster was referring to the scripture that the bible says to "go forth and multiply". But that is more about reproduction (which is a common function associated with man and woman) than actual Christianity

          1. A Troubled Man profile image60
            A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Isn't that in the OT?

            Is that also not one of the most irresponsible commands to come out of the OT?

            1. 0
              Deepes Mindposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              Depends on how one chooses to look at it

              1. A Troubled Man profile image60
                A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                How about from the perspective of reality?

                Runaway over-population problems coupled with lack of family planning and the words, "Go Forth and Multiply" in billions of homes and hotel night stands.

        2. days leaper profile image48
          days leaperposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          "creating life", Sorry, my words aren't always so carefully selected and tend to lend themselves to much scrutiny from those whom I find too exacting -for my sensibilities (no offence intended.)
          Perhaps I meant making the best of life rather than just trampling over, or such.  Hope that helps you.

          1. A Troubled Man profile image60
            A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Sorry, but that's even more ridiculous, Christianity does no such thing. Making the best of life is certainly not wasting it in abject worship to an invisible god.

            1. days leaper profile image48
              days leaperposted 3 years ago in reply to this

              It all depends on your perspective of what the best of life is, and the 'hand' you're dealt in the first place.

              1. A Troubled Man profile image60
                A Troubled Manposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                What does that have to do with Christianity? Shouldn't the hand you're dealt with be no different than anyone else if your religion is valid?

                1. days leaper profile image48
                  days leaperposted 3 years ago in reply to this

                  I'm surprised, as that sounded a bit niave.??? (sorry, but it did.)   If you look around there is no real "same" every-one is different from circumstances, social class, levels of intelligence, opportunities in life, problems in life and the ways each deals with these.  Whether religious or not religious, sexuality, even levels of physical fitness, assertiveness, aggression, etc. the list is exhaustive,  all play a part in the life an individual has.  Rarely, two are exactly the same.  Even twins have differences.  I would say life is too many and varied to give a nut shell answer on that one..
                  No Christian is the same, no Athiest, Agnostic, etc., etc...

    9. christian107 profile image84
      christian107posted 3 years ago in reply to this

      Free will doesn't mean God accepts all our decisions. That's why he banished Adam and Eve from the garden of eden because of choosing to disobey God and eat the fruit

      1. Zelkiiro profile image85
        Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago in reply to this

        I blame Adam. Eve had no knowledge of what deception was, and thus was tricked, whereas Adam knew better but still did it anyway.

        1. days leaper profile image48
          days leaperposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          I thought this was more metaphorical than literal.  But, like any-one else can only guess.  Isn't there a saying "It takes two to Tango"!

          1. Zelkiiro profile image85
            Zelkiiroposted 3 years ago in reply to this

            Of course it's metaphorical. If it were literal, that would mean snakes could talk, and if they could, my sister's snakes sure haven't had anything interesting to say yet.

  2. tantrum profile image60
    tantrumposted 6 years ago

    Lets forget about God and live our life in freedom!
    For Christ's sake !!
    lol lol

    1. Mamelody profile image61
      Mamelodyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      lol lol

  3. theirishobserver. profile image61
    theirishobserver.posted 6 years ago

    I think that real Christians love their neighbour - it is only the ones who have darkness in their heart that point out other people "They who shout loudest about the sins of others do so to conceal their own sins" smile

    1. Mamelody profile image61
      Mamelodyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      true.. classic case of one looking at the spec in another's eye instead of the log in their eyes wink

  4. 0
    A Texanposted 6 years ago

    I like lesbians, I want two!

    1. Cagsil profile image83
      Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Hey Texan, are you trying to get out of your marriage? You want two lesbians, are they to convert your wife? Thus, allowing you out of the marriage?

      just kidding lol lol smile

      1. 0
        A Texanposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        My TV broke! Gotta do something..

    2. TheGlassSpider profile image81
      TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Strangely enough, my roommate and I have been looking around for passages in regards to lesbians...and we can't find any. We can only find things talking specifically about "men laying with men."

      It seems perhaps the Bible has no problems with lesbians? Does anyone else know more about this??

      1. Maddie Ruud profile image82
        Maddie Ruudposted 6 years ago in reply to this



        I think the assumption is that women couldn't possibly live without men.  It just never occurs to some people that girls could actually like girls and ONLY girls (see A Texan's "I want two lesbians" comment--c'mon, A Texan... you want two bisexual women... lesbians don't want you, by definiton).

        Another example of this male hubris is seen in the number of women persecuted for homosexuality by the Nazis during the Holocaust being infintesimally small compared to the number of men.

        1. TheGlassSpider profile image81
          TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Given the rules and culture of Biblical times, I can sort of understand believing that a woman couldn't possibly live without a man at that time (not that it's FAIR, only that it's UNDERSTANDABLE, you know?)...but it's amazing to see, after so much time and progress, how much people still cling to such an ancient perception.

      2. Cagsil profile image83
        Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        There can only be one reason to gain the answer.

        It's biological. It is completely rational for man and woman, to be attracted to one another, however, for growth of the civilization it's scripted to discourage homosexuality because it makes no sense. It's human nature to mate, create more life and live on through generation after generation of a family line.

        To live a life of homosexuality directly violates everything known about human biology and growth of the human race. It out-right defies evolution of the human species.

        The only problem here is views/perspectives/perceptions made by others. To properly understand life, is to know that you want to have an eternal life and find happiness/love. This is done by understanding how the body works, learning a civilized way to live life, with family values and a moral fiber of good.

        It requires mating with someone of the opposite sex, so offspring can be made. It isn't possible for same sex genders to mate for life, because it defeats one of the meanings of being human.

        I'm not saying anything against gays or lesbians. I'm simply trying to make everyone understand that it's a perception? It's this pathetic view that keeps homosexuality an issue.

        There is no god and no sin. These are both religious terms. Other than a dictionary, you will not find them anywhere else, but religious scripture. Any belief based on faith alone, is not a belief as defined by humanity's standards for forming a belief.

        I guess my rant is done. hmm

        1. TheGlassSpider profile image81
          TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Um. Okay. Let me be more specific.

          Does anyone here know of any Biblical passages that deal specifically with lesbians?

        2. 60
          shaymusshayposted 3 years ago in reply to this

          The argument about biology and we 'need to procreate in order to carry on the species' is entirely a societal thing. I DO NOT need to procreate. Neither did  my parents, or yours, or my friends, or my adopted friends. We have the CHOICE to procreate. So that in itself is a weak argument as 'why homosexuality is wrong'. This also plays off sadly on the wrong side of natural selection. Diabetes in most case is genetic, likewise heart disease and other biological issues. To say we need to procreate, and that its a part of us, is like saying even if I have a life threatening disorder that could kill me upon the birth of my child, i should still go ahead, because I contributed to the gene pool.

          That's sad. Ever wonder why physical attraction between straight folks ignore 'making babies'? Because we aren't REQUIRED to make children. We have a part of us that looks for companionship, whether or not we we children.
          @TheGlassSpider, no there no bible passage that deals with lesbians. The ones that christians typically pull out are Romans 1:26-27, but that is not a scripture of commandment/ condemnation. Its a scripture of people simply ignoring god and falling back to the old ways of idolatry.

          Hope that helps!!

      3. skyfire profile image72
        skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        As per staunch Christians like Brother Micah, "women need to "know their place" in a man's world. But there is no rule about bisexuals in bible. hmm....i think god forgot to mention that while revelation, second dictation(err edition) anyone ?

      4. Mamelody profile image61
        Mamelodyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I believe its harder to find lesbians than it is to find gays..

        1. Maddie Ruud profile image82
          Maddie Ruudposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          What makes you say that?  That's not true at all, at least where I'm from.

          1. Mamelody profile image61
            Mamelodyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            well I always thought they were more gay people than they are lesbians generally.. besides in my area there are no lesbians.. well none of them have come out of the closet yet..

            1. Maddie Ruud profile image82
              Maddie Ruudposted 6 years ago in reply to this



              Maybe all the lesbians move away, because there are no other lesbians.  wink

              1. Greek One profile image80
                Greek Oneposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                to what magical island would they go???

                Lesbos, of course!

    3. Ron Montgomery profile image60
      Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      http://www.youthink.com/quiz_images/quiz1726outcome1.jpg

      Here you go, have fun.

      1. 0
        A Texanposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        eh, I've seen worse

      2. Greek One profile image80
        Greek Oneposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        what do these to gentlemen have to do with lesbians???

        1. ThoughtfulSpot profile image81
          ThoughtfulSpotposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          LMFOA!!!

      3. 0
        Kenrick Chatmanposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Yikes... lol... beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

  5. TheGlassSpider profile image81
    TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago
  6. TheGlassSpider profile image81
    TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago

    LMAO lol

  7. ThoughtfulSpot profile image81
    ThoughtfulSpotposted 6 years ago

    Ok, I generally avoid these threads like the plague... but I'm having a crazy kind of day, so why not.  In the spirit of acceptance and "loving thy neighbor" and such... Perhaps we should rephrase the post title too.  Not all "Christians have a problem with Homosexuals."  (Although I know some may argue that you are not a Christian if you don't take issue with it roll)  I know a lot of very lovely people who happen to be gay.  I also know a lot of very lovely people who happen to be Christian.  I even (will wonders never cease yikes ) know a lot of very lovely people who happen to be gay AND Christian.  I don't think that the OP in anyway intended to imply that all Christians have an issue with homosexuality, but its a pet peeve of mine that the two have to be seen as opposing forces.  I happen to believe in God and also not give rat's ass who my friends are sleeping with.

    Okie dokie... down off my soapbox now.

    1. Greek One profile image80
      Greek Oneposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      well said!

      (although I don't think sleeping with a rat's ass is allowed either)

      1. ThoughtfulSpot profile image81
        ThoughtfulSpotposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Thanks...
        And, ok.  Should I not give a horse's ass instead? Is that any better? lol

        1. Greek One profile image80
          Greek Oneposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          ... i just think cougars are ok...

          at least i hope they are

  8. premierkj profile image78
    premierkjposted 6 years ago

    It's pointless listening to the catholic church about anything. they insist that homosexuals are abominations and yet they destroy the innocence of boys themselves.

    1. tantrum profile image60
      tantrumposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      lol

    2. Mamelody profile image61
      Mamelodyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      now that my friend is the truest statement I've heard in a long time wink

  9. Pandoras Box profile image82
    Pandoras Boxposted 6 years ago

    The short answer is because their books tell them to.

  10. skyfire profile image72
    skyfireposted 6 years ago

    I like this "jesus died for our sins" line... A guy who can't save his own life is going to save us all eh ?. It's like guy who got banned from adsense will guarantee maximizing profit from adsense.

    1. TheGlassSpider profile image81
      TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Ummm...I know you probably don't really care, but the point was that he never attempted to save his own life...he gave it freely--hence the idea of sacrifice.

      1. skyfire profile image72
        skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Sacrifice ? Nice... so there are thousands of suicide bombers out there who sacrifice should be taken into consideration as sinless saviors for some x religion.. Those who don't value their own life can't be taken for granted for protecting lives of others..that applies to heroes....side-heroes can sacrifice LOL...

        1. TheGlassSpider profile image81
          TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          There's a big difference between not stopping your enemies from killing you and strapping on a bomb and driving into a building and blowing yourself up along with a bunch of people. I understand you don't believe in Jesus, and that's fine, but I think you're smarter than that statement.

          1. earnestshub profile image87
            earnestshubposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            The big difference is the method. Was it OK to invade Iraq and destroy it's entire infrastructure in the name of god? Bush said so and thought so, despite the lack of evidence needed by the U.N. Killed hundreds of thousands of the Iraq people, babies, children and women copped most of the bombs.
            Gotta use lots of bombs or the economy slows for your mates in the war game.
            Gotta knock out all the water and electricity so that your mates can come in with huge government contracts to rebuild it without oversight so that they can do it half assed and pocket the difference.
            Nice work if you can get it!

            I have no sympathy for the methods of walking bombs, but most are just scared bullied children and women, taught from childhood to hate anyone who does not follow their crazy Taliban based religion.
            The next time America starts a war, I would like them to say "we need to protect oil supplies for Americans, and make some bucks for the boys."
            More honest than saying god sanctioned it as Bush did.

            1. TheGlassSpider profile image81
              TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Um...Okay. I agree with you, earnest--I'm totally against America's terrorism in the Middle East as well. I'm not exactly sure what that has to do with what skyfire and I were "talking" about--all I'm saying is that the story of Jesus says that he did not stop his enemies from killing him, that is why it is called a sacrifice. This is a different thing from committing suicide and killing a bunch of people with you, that's called murder no matter which side of the pond you're on...IMHO.

          2. skyfire profile image72
            skyfireposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            There is difference ? yeah sure,in one side person can't even protect his own life but wants to protect his radical-wannabe-humanity views by showing his sacrifice as message to remember his views for his followers and in another case,person wants to protect views by passing it to his followers by showing them his suicide attempt for those radical views. Both are wasting their life in order to protect their radical views and doesn't deserve a position of being called as savior. Besides a guy who can't even protect his own life under the excuse of sin is going to protect the rest of world ? Let's get real. People who can't even defend their own life know how to protect others ? With what tablets of "refill-my-sin" and blabber of "love ya enemy" ? yeah sure,let's wait for second coming, as first version failed rationally.

            1. TheGlassSpider profile image81
              TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Hm. Perhaps I over-estimated you. Thank you for pointing out my error.

  11. 60
    foreignpressposted 6 years ago

    For me, as a Christian, it's a live and let live attitude. I don't approve of homosexuality. But in our society two people have a "right" to be homosexual without fear of persecution. But I don't associate with homosexuals. One time I learned that a homosexual was going to be ordained as a minister. I left the church. The Bible does make specific references to homosexuality and condemns the practice. The Bible also states that not everybody will get to heaven because of personal choices. As our society becomes more liberal to accommodate everybody's "rights," more and more people will be excluded from seeking eternal life. Homosexuality and other liberal values will lead to the degradation of our society and, ultimately, to global annhilation via Armageddon. Homosexuality, transvestism, and cross-dressing are now being taught in grade school classrooms. My kids wouldn't go to those schools. One time, I saw a cross-dresser (man as a woman) working as a security screener. He even used the women's restrooms. It was kind of funny because he struggled to keep his voice at a high pitch like a woman's. As a security screener, he was patting women down which was upsetting to the women travelers. But he was allowed to do this because he had rights. But at what point does one person's rights infringe on someone else? With the integration of so many peoples and cultures, our society has become too complicated and too diverse. Too many people want the same thing. And, for me, that's frightening.

    1. 60
      shaymusshayposted 3 years ago in reply to this

      just out of curiousity, should I approve of your heterosexuality? or are you somehow miraculously different than the rest of the world?

  12. Cagsil profile image83
    Cagsilposted 6 years ago

    One thing people seem to dismiss the fact....gender bias. It's ridiculous...men "gay" and women "lesbian" labels are a farce.

    The fact that someone's sexual behaviors are out in the open more so, is irrelevant and meaningless. It does present a problem between religion and other people's views, about what is morally right and wrong.

    To be a homosexual or lesbian, is not a morally wrong action. One happens to not make sense and the other does. Homosexuality in and of itself is not natural, regardless of what people think or perceive it to be.

    Simply and solely based on the simply fact that we do reproduce offspring of our own. And, to do that- it must be with some sort of participation from the opposite sex.

    Should you decide on the fact of not having kids or the hassle of having to be a parent, then it is obvious, you put less value on your life than it is meant to have in the first place.

    And, no I do not have any problems with "gays" or "lesbians", simply because their sexual exploits are their concerns only and not mine. However, the perception is what must die.

  13. earnestshub profile image87
    earnestshubposted 6 years ago

    The OT is not only homophobic, it is filled with other neurotic thinking as well, all apparently from god.... smile

  14. earnestshub profile image87
    earnestshubposted 6 years ago

    Oh OK. I am sorry I find nothing wrong with my homosexual friends.
    Is that repentant enough?

  15. Onusonus profile image86
    Onusonusposted 6 years ago

    I have no problem with homosexuals, I have a problem with people litigating against the institution of marriage, Which was created by God. God should make the rules about marriage, not people.

    1. Maddie Ruud profile image82
      Maddie Ruudposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      In that case, marriage shouldn't be a government institution at all.

      1. Onusonus profile image86
        Onusonusposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Oh, I don't think you want that. History shows that once the government stops supporting the basic family unit, the system crashes.
        Better to just give the homosexuals legal unions with the same benifites. Just don't call it marriage.

        1. Maddie Ruud profile image82
          Maddie Ruudposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          How about we give everyone legal unions with the same benefits, and let religious institutions deal with "marriage?"

          1. Onusonus profile image86
            Onusonusposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Whatever makes it easier for the abomination of desolation to stand in the holy place.

          2. 0
            Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            If all civil unions are deemed acceptable, then every single person who has a roommate or sharing a house should have the same rights then, yes? if two people are college roommates, then move in together with no sexual arrangement for say a lifetime, should they also be allowed these 'benefits', if one is ill or dies?

            What a social dilemma that would be.

            1. 0
              Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Bingo!
              Yes, that would be the end result of the liberal "diversity" rules.  Wonder if any of the libs would balk at that?

              1. 0
                Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                ..i suppose not.

                liberal ideas are quick to want, not to think.
                i recently was in Union Sqaure NY when the proposition rally was going on, not one person was there because of 'equality'. they were there to push the 'issue' of social acceptance aka politics.

                if civil unions are to be upheld properly, then very single divorce must be overturned, every pre-nump, dumped and every adult over the age of 18 ( 16 in some places ) who has assisted their family in anyway and been apart of a divorce should be given the same benefits as well. More so in fact, bcause of 'emotional' stress/damages.

                something to think about.

            2. Uninvited Writer profile image82
              Uninvited Writerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Civil unions are acceptable. And if you want people living together denied benefits then you should accept gay marriage because these people are making a commitment to one another.

              1. 0
                Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                i, personally, do not care either way.
                but when the issue of civil arrangement becomes sexual propaganda, then yes, it offends me as -to be clear- a non religious person.

                no present civil system on earth allows for complete benefit outside of 'marriage'. which i find ironic, because marriage is more moral than civil.

                take for example: a female and male have a child. the child turns 18, still living at home. both parents get into a car accident and are unable to work. the child then becomes the caregiver/income holder. After two years, the parents recover fully and then opt to divorce.

                the child then should be compensated (receive benefits) for their civil duty in caring for the parents, same as a woman receives compensation for divorce.
                See the problem?

            3. Jeff Berndt profile image90
              Jeff Berndtposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              That's gotta be the stupidest argument I've ever heard.

              If the people living together want to get married, then they get married. If they don't, then they don't.

              Are you being deliberately obtuse?

              1. 0
                Deborah Sextonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                **********************************
                Yes, he is, and all of his arguments about anything are pretty much like this one.

              2. Ron Montgomery profile image60
                Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                You are being too generous.  I think your first statement was more on the money smile

              3. 0
                Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                The issue is for them -under union or marriage to retain financial benefits. This is what is being pushed for. If that is the case than it should include any same sex or opposite sex couple -married or not, sleeping together or not- according to their agenda, who are entitled to remuneration due to labor, mental, emotional support for a period of time. Add to that children who assist parents during times of disability, providing financial assistance, emotional support etc.

                The fallout from such a thing would be disastrous and completely turn the legal system on its ear. Already the ACLU in the states is torn on the issue, because of the aforementioned.

                Everyone thinks is purely about sexuality, and it isn't. They have turned a private sexual act into public orgy aka political lobbying.

                Ridiculous isn't the word.
                If that is obtuse, then I am glad to be.

        2. Mark Knowles profile image60
          Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Which history is this exactly? The system crashes huh? This some special mormon history books that I am too uneducated to read?

          And wat a "basic family unit"? One 40 year old guy, Twenty three, 14 year old girls and some kids? lol

          I prefer mine over 15. wink

          1. Onusonus profile image86
            Onusonusposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Awh Mark you've been doing some reading! Thats good, but you should always pray for spiritual guidance in order to come to the right conclusions.wink

    2. TheGlassSpider profile image81
      TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      He did set the rules about marriage. He said when you have sex with someone, you become one flesh, and that is marriage. Look it up.

    3. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
      Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      AGREED>

      and GOD says that two people joined by the bond of God (LOVE) shall remain bonded for so long as the bond remains. So once the love is gone, so is the bond created by God. Whether the bond of love is between two men, two women, or a man and a woman, Or two women and a man, two men and a woman...etc etc etc.

      Mankind's legal ceremony is not the bonding of souls. It is the financial joining of bank accounts/assets and is solely a creation of mankind.(legal marriage)

      This is what God says. Prove that it isn't the word of God.

  16. 0
    Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago

    No. Divorce isn't good with Jesus, except for the Biblical exception.
    But repentance is.
    Children of God are no longer under condemnation.

    FYI, when Paul talked about the rules of divorce, he was referring to the Roman Law of that time, in which men had to have an actual bill of divorcement.  Some weren't doing that; they were simply going from woman to woman without legally divorcing them.  The Word says the women will be "called" adulteresses.  At least that's my understanding of it, from what history I've read.
    However, yes, I do believe it's wrong to divorce, and it's wrong to re-marry someone who's not the former spouse.
    What can I say?
    I will say I'm an adulteress, accused, guilty, and marked for death.....except for the grace of God.   In Him, I am married to Him, a part of the Bride of Christ,  even though I have an earthly husband;  because He no longer condemns me for former sin.

    1. TheGlassSpider profile image81
      TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Brenda, the Bible specifically points out that it is worse to re-marry an ex than it is to re-marry anyone else.

      I'm not even going to touch the "Bride" thing with a ten foot pole. Suffice it to say, MANY people haven't a clue who or what the Bride is.

    2. livelonger profile image89
      livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Your understanding of it doesn't really matter. For fundamentalists, there is no such thing as interpretation or understanding of what the Bible said.

      Jesus condemns divorce - and makes no allowance for remarriage whatsoever - four times in the Bible. There is no need to fabricate exceptions, because there aren't any. What Jesus said is what matters, not an English king over a millennium later, if you're a Christian, of course.

      So for an unrepentant sinner, incessant scripture-quoting, constant condemnations of others' sins, and pledges of undying love for Christ, are nothing more than window dressing that Jesus condemned himself. What matters, as you've said yourself, Brenda, is turning away from your own sin.

      1. 0
        Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Well, let's see, livelonger.
        I suppose you would have me divorce my current husband, become some kind of nun-like recluse, and speak only when spoken to. Or re-marry my first husband.
        hmm....
        Two or three wrongs don't make a right.
        Only Jesus could make it right.
        And He finally did.
        I doubt you'd understand how it happened.  Suffice it to say I went through punishment for my sins, but that, upon realization of my sins, and repentance, I am now no longer under Judgement.
        And especially not your judgement!

        1. livelonger profile image89
          livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          No, you should have never divorced your husband, if you are following the literal word of Christ. You should return back to him. Do you really need for me to point out the scripture that makes this plain as day?

          Are you saying Jesus was wrong with respect to divorce & remarriage?

          I'm not judging you. I'm telling you what the Bible says about marriage and divorce. All of your explanations and excuses are really meaningless, as are my feelings on the matter. You getting defensive towards what I'm saying is really missing the point, isn't it? You're living in an adulterous marriage as defined by the Bible, and you are thus living a life of unrepentant sin.

  17. earnestshub profile image87
    earnestshubposted 6 years ago

    One member of my family has been married 3 times. smile
    Not religious, must be a bad person. A sinner. A low life even? smile

    You would condemn anyone who does not fit within your interpretation of an interpretation of an interpretation of a book that was never original, the stories had been told since the time of Ra.
    Just a pack of lies written by a bunch of lunatics.

    1. Obscurely Diverse profile image60
      Obscurely Diverseposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Praise be...  I concur!  Earnest is a man that seeks truth, not BS.
      I think the Christians that have problems with Homosexuals...is due to the "Dino Dung Dogma Syndrome."  Ha-ha, I just coined a condition...

      Personally, I'm straight and like big booty babes, but I still think that most "homos" are born homosexual.  I'm sure some badly altered lifestyles may influence certain same gender relations, but for the most part, they are simply born that way; plain & simple.

      1. 0
        sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        We have a winner of this years Turnip Award! His capacity for rational thought processes hasn't turnip up yet.big_smile

        1. Obscurely Diverse profile image60
          Obscurely Diverseposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Everything I said was rational.  By the way, I like turnip greens.  Quit acting like a fool; go run along and recreate in a cornfield or something...

          1. 0
            sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Us breeders procreate not recreate.smile

            1. Obscurely Diverse profile image60
              Obscurely Diverseposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Of course "your act" of "procreation" wouldn't involve "recreation"...how sad; how lame...  I prefer fornication without offspring (birth control), but whatever floats your boat.  I like to recreate; I'm sorry to hear that you have no fun.  Ha-ha!  I just hope you don't support inbreds amid your so-called rationale...  LOL!

              1. 0
                sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Support inbreds! Now you're insulting my family, poophead!big_smile

                1. Obscurely Diverse profile image60
                  Obscurely Diverseposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I probably did...  Ha-ha-ha!

                  1. 0
                    sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    I love everyone of you and you don't have to believe in anything I believe in there's plenty of room for us all!:)My wife wants to take me to the fishing show so I gots to go! Love you all! Take care and God bless!smile

  18. Paradise7 profile image86
    Paradise7posted 6 years ago

    I don't think ALL Christians are intolerant of gays.  There is something about a certain lifestyle that leads people away from the "straight and narrow path to salvation".  The narrow bit CAN be overdone.

  19. Uninvited Writer profile image82
    Uninvited Writerposted 6 years ago

    Isn't that what you want gay people to do? Become nun-like reculses?

    1. calpol25 profile image76
      calpol25posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Look this thread has been done time and time again, I did it myself when I first came to hub pages and believe me this is one argument that neither side will win be it for the right or wrong reasons.
      I am gay myself and christian, arguing your point here is a waist of time trust me "live and let live" is the approach to take on this one.

      1. Uninvited Writer profile image82
        Uninvited Writerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        True, you can't reason with some people smile

      2. TheGlassSpider profile image81
        TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        We know the outcome of many things, and talk about them anyway. It seems to be a part of human nature. But that's a great attitude, live and let live....A good idea.

    2. 0
      Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I would want gays to turn to the Lord, truly and with that change of heart that makes them a new creature in Christ.
      His strength is what they'd have to lean upon then.
      I've seen it done.  It's possible.  Few are willing to live that life, though.

      1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
        Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        But like you they get to keep being gay and sinning...so long as the alternative is an unpleasant life for them? (denying their desires and living like a recluse...)

      2. livelonger profile image89
        livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Even fewer living in adulterous marriages like yourself are willing to turn away from such an unrepentantly sinful lifestyle.

        There are a few that do. Most don't.

  20. waynet profile image47
    waynetposted 6 years ago

    I don't think it's all Christians, it could be a Michael or a Peter....

    1. calpol25 profile image76
      calpol25posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      your right waynet there is good and bad on all sides

  21. 0
    Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago

    ...if the rise in alternate sexual relationships over the past decade is ant indication of the 'christian' view, then my answer would be no, they don't seem to have a problem with it.

    ...unless of course pastor so-in-so or father-what's-his-name get publicly embarrassed by it.

    1. 0
      Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      The Christian view doesn't condone it.
      Are you trying to say it does?

      1. livelonger profile image89
        livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        The Christian view doesn't view your marriage as even valid.

        You are married under the law, but not under God (except to your first husband, of course).

        Of course, Christ is pretty clear about those living in adulterous marriages, pretending it's the real thing. It's a life of unrepentant sin, no matter how you want to sugar-coat it.

        1. 0
          Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          He's very clear about casting pearls before swine, too.
          And I think I've done enough of that for a while.
          Keep your stubborn view.  There's nothing I can do about it.

          1. Uninvited Writer profile image82
            Uninvited Writerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            He is just giving you the same argument you give against gays.

            1. livelonger profile image89
              livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Exactly.

              Brenda's a "cafeteria Christian" - the only sins that are worth condemning are those she isn't committing.

            2. earnestshub profile image87
              earnestshubposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Exactly, but Brenda has this blind spot.... smile

          2. livelonger profile image89
            livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Not my view, Brenda. It's Christ's view, and you know it.

            As for casting pearls before swine, I suppose if you don't want to follow your own scripture then so be it.

      2. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
        Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

        Hate the Sin, Love the Sinner.

        Love thy enemy as thy self.

        Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

        Judge not lest ye be judged.

        I'm sure there are more...

        1. calpol25 profile image76
          calpol25posted 6 years ago in reply to this

          That is the right approach.

  22. 0
    A Texanposted 6 years ago

    I like the live and let live idea too, but, how many of you are for letting gay bashers do their bashing? Would you apply the same live and let live philosophy?

    1. TheGlassSpider profile image81
      TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      The idea of live and let live is that no one needs to "bash" anyone else. Rational discussion is one thing...even disagreement. But bashing...unnecessary.

      1. 0
        A Texanposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Thats not very tolerant of you!

        1. TheGlassSpider profile image81
          TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          How do you figure? I figure it's ultimately tolerant. You can do, think, or believe whatever you want. We can talk about it. We don't have to agree on it...and there's no reason for me to be insulting, harmful, or mean to you or anyone else about it. "Bashing," particularly the actual physical sort, is unnecessary. *shrug*

          1. 0
            A Texanposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Some people are born assholes, just as some people are born gay. You mean to say that you would not be tolerant of someone if they were being an asshole to you? Seems hypocritical to me to be tolerant of some things but not all things.

            1. TheGlassSpider profile image81
              TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Well, see, we disagree on a basic premise there. I don't believe there are any asshole babies. I believe being an asshole is a choice. I have assholish tendencies...but I can choose not to act on them. big_smile

            2. calpol25 profile image76
              calpol25posted 6 years ago in reply to this

              your right it is hypocritical, but honestly would you be tolerant to some one if they were being an ass hole to you?

              Its a strange one to answer  that one lol:)

            3. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
              Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              roll  so...you are tolerant of gays, then YOU must also be tolerant of the rapist that rapes your daughter???

              Some things can be tolerated some things cannot.

              Be wise and figure out the difference...there are no easy absolute answers.

              1. 0
                A Texanposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                "so...you are tolerant of gays, then YOU must also be tolerant of the rapist that rapes your daughter???"

                Why would I be tolerant of the rapist? WTF are you trying to say? Being gay is the same as being a rapist?

                Be wise, shit man, I can't follow your wisdom!

                1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
                  Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  You said if someone is tolerant of one thing, they must be tolerant of ALL things, not me.

                  1. 0
                    A Texanposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Yeah, I reread that, sorry, my bad!

    2. calpol25 profile image76
      calpol25posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Look gay bashers,  will always be around there is nothing we can do about it,except rely on the law, however the rise in gay bashing is slowly dropping because of homosexuality is more accepted these days in certain areas and a true fact is that  nine times out of ten they are gay themselves, their in a stage called denial and cant accept themselves, granted what they do is terrible but, you cant help those who wont help themselves.
      Shakespeare wrote " i think she doth protest too much." in other words those who shout the loudest have something to hide themselves.
      But the point is with gay bashing you can not take the live and let live approach to them, it would be hypocritical to even say so.

      1. 0
        A Texanposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Hmmmm, you want to be accepted for who you are, thats understandable, I accept you. Others don't accept you and I don't believe that out of 10 people who are against you 9 would be gay, where exactly did you get that number?

        My point is no one here is totally tolerant of anyone else, its just the way it is!

        1. calpol25 profile image76
          calpol25posted 6 years ago in reply to this

          no i got that wrong this is what i meant to write (sorry)  usually at least one of the people who attacks is gay but has been hiding the fact through denial and is jealous of the other gay person who has accepted them selves.
          Therefore inciting homophobic friends into attacking the gay person where as they would not physically attack only verbally, you can check it out but its usually this way, however some people are just naturally evil look at the nazis for example they murdered anyone.

          1. 0
            A Texanposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Except the one they should have murdered! Hitler!

            1. calpol25 profile image76
              calpol25posted 6 years ago in reply to this

              correct

    3. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
      Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      A fair fight, I'd say is one thing, a gang of cowards beating someone who doesn't stand a chance quite another. Violence is never a good thing, but sometimes it is the only thing.

      1. 0
        A Texanposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Maybe gay bashers was the wrong analogy everyone seems to think I mean actual bashing! I'm talking about not agreeing with a lifestyle, you don't agree that a gay bashers lifestyle is good and they don't think a homosexuals life is good.

        Most of you are bashing Brenda because of her beliefs, she states her beliefs and for the most part y'all go ballistic! Do you not see the hypocrisy?

        1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
          Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          It is HER hypocrisy we all see. That is what we are trying to point out to her.

          {or maybe I should say that is what I am trying to point out to her}

          1. 0
            A Texanposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            And she is responding to a question asked on a forum, so, who is being intolerant?

            1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
              Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              as are we all (responding).

              Being a hypocrite in your response doesn't mean everyone that sees the hypocricy (or as Earnie said, a blind spot) has to just pretend that we don't see it, because it is in response to a thread...

              1. 0
                A Texanposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                No, you are intolerant of her beliefs, you think they are wrong, just as she believes homosexuality is wrong! There is not a dimes difference between her and you!

                1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
                  Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Intolerant and believing they are wrong are not the same thing...

                  1. 0
                    A Texanposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Continuously pointing out you think she is wrong is intolerant, whats so hard to understand about that, face it, you are intolerant of her views. Not that big a deal in the long run.

                2. earnestshub profile image87
                  earnestshubposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I would have thought that being intolerant of intolerance towards others would be the right response. smile

                  1. 0
                    A Texanposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Intolerant of intolerance? roll

      2. calpol25 profile image76
        calpol25posted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Its true we descend from animals and our animal instinct is what makes us fight, to protect ourselves and children from predators.

        1. calpol25 profile image76
          calpol25posted 6 years ago in reply to this

          But to attack for no reason is truly wrong especially when its more than one,

          1. 0
            A Texanposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Absolutely!

    4. 60
      (Q)posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      You're hearing crickets chirping because no one wants to stand up and tell you just how silly your statement is, in that bashing others is not a live and let live philosophy. So, I'll stand up. smile

      1. TheGlassSpider profile image81
        TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Hey...what am I, chopped liver? wink He and I had a whole conversation about this...Check it out (a few pages back).

        A Texan wrote: I like the live and let live idea too, but, how many of you are for letting gay bashers do their bashing? Would you apply the same live and let live philosophy?

        TheGlassSpider wrote: The idea of live and let live is that no one needs to "bash" anyone else. Rational discussion is one thing...even disagreement. But bashing...unnecessary.

  23. 0
    A Texanposted 6 years ago

    (((((Crickets)))))

    1. 0
      Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      lol you heard `em too.....

      how do Tex?

      1. 0
        A Texanposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Howdy

  24. Doug Hughes profile image60
    Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago

    If you get back to the basic premise of the separation of church and state, this isn't so difficult.

    If you belong to a church that thinks homosexuality is wrong, you and anyone in your curch should folow that belief - IN YOUR OWN HOME AND IN YOUR OWN CHURCH!

    Outside of your church and home, discrimination based on sexual orientation is not only wrong, at some point it may be a crime.

    Now look at 'marriage'.  Within your church, you can decide it's only for procration and the woman can't ride on top. Your business. No church should be forced to perfom ceremonies that violate their code, and I don't think anyone is asking them to.

    The secular definition of marriage does NOT need to conform to your religious definition. But it can provide the same legal protections and obligations for a gay couple as a straight couple has. Joint property, medical insurance for your spouse, all the family rights a spouse would have. It's not complicated and it IS fair.

    Thc conflict is the way religous nuts want to demand that the legal marriage conform to their biblical view. The way you sort it out in discussion  is to NOT confuse the legal institution with  the religious one with the same name. 'Marriage' (in a religious sense) should be exactly what you and your spouse believe it is. But don't force it on me in the secular world, because my view is probably different than yours.

    1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
      Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Here Here!  Well said and I completely agree. Nicely Done.

    2. TheGlassSpider profile image81
      TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Nice! Very well said.

  25. blondepoet profile image80
    blondepoetposted 6 years ago

    I don't care if you are black, white, green, red, gay, straight, drug addict, poor or rich. I will treat you the same as you treat me. smile

    1. earnestshub profile image87
      earnestshubposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Well said BP. smile

    2. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
      Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Oh sure...so since I'm a middle-class, bi-sexual, non-drug addicted Asian, your going to treat me like....  (grinning)


      wink

    3. 0
      china manposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      you forgot short bald fat and ugly - what you got against me then big_smile

      1. blondepoet profile image80
        blondepoetposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        You know I love ya.

    4. Friendlyword profile image60
      Friendlywordposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      "I will treat you the same as you treat me"
      Sounds like something you should hear from a Christian. How can some people call themselves Christians and be nothing like Jesus?

      1. blondepoet profile image80
        blondepoetposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I am not a Christian. I just don't have predjudice against people who are different to me.

        1. Uninvited Writer profile image82
          Uninvited Writerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Yes, many Christians think they have a lock on human decency...all the while condemning any one who disagrees with them.

          I was always brought up to treat people the way I would like to be treated.

          1. blondepoet profile image80
            blondepoetposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            I am 100% with you UW smile

  26. earnestshub profile image87
    earnestshubposted 6 years ago

    UW wrote:
    "I was always brought up to treat people the way I would like to be treated."

    I tried that, but could not find enough people who want to be strapped to a light post naked and lightly whipped with green asparagus stalks. smile

    1. 0
      china manposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Blondepoet - a patient for you here !!!!

      1. blondepoet profile image80
        blondepoetposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Your next appointment is at 6.35pm. smilesmile

    2. blondepoet profile image80
      blondepoetposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Hahah Earnest do you have a fetish for asparagus???

      1. earnestshub profile image87
        earnestshubposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Yes it comes on strong in the evenings, which is most unfortunate as at that time of day the light pole freezes my vitals! smile

        1. blondepoet profile image80
          blondepoetposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Haha Earnest oh you are a gem smile

  27. Jerami profile image78
    Jeramiposted 6 years ago

    I am acusing no one of any particular fault.
      No one has to; cause we all know which one belongs to us.
       If not we are depending upon someone to explain it to us.
     
       It seems that we have all had the spot light shine on us at some time in our lives. 
       Who will the light shine upon tomorrow.
         
     
       Yes, many Christians think they have a lock on human decency...all the while condemning any one who disagrees with them.
       This comment seems to be true across the board.
       We have all risen to anger at some time in our lives over  someone disagreeing with us..
       "If" I judge Brenda now for being judgmental am I not being judgmental?
        We must be careful how we hate the things that we hate lest we become as bad or worse than the thing that we hate.

       It seems that there is a lot of anamosity coming from every direction.  Would be a good thing if we could get that under controll.
       Well;  I think that I'm going to bed  good night all.
    Hope everyone feels better tomorrow.

  28. cindyvine profile image83
    cindyvineposted 6 years ago

    it does say somewhere that that's why God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah I think.

    1. 0
      Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      yup. it does.

      is it a coincidence that two historical cities, completely engaged in murders, rapes, incests, sexual behaviors ranging from man-man to female-animal to groups-animals, just so happened to be destroyed, simultaneously, by massive meteor showers?
      I think not.

      ====

      for the record, regarding Christianities tolerance toward alternate sexuality:

      combined together, Muslim ,Hebrew & Eastern religions outweigh Christianity nearly 3:1. Apart from America, most Muslim countries abhor any form of alternate sexuality as do many Hebrews. Muslim law states that such people should be put to death immediately.

      I find it interesting, of all religious systems, Christianity is the most 'picked on' but the most tolerant of things.
      Is Christianity passive? Is it too liberal? Perhaps because of such passivity, people are upset 'subconsciously'?
      Just a thought...

  29. Rod Marsden profile image86
    Rod Marsdenposted 6 years ago

    Basically you can pull references out of the bible that can be misinterpreted as being anti-gay. Mind you there are parts of the bible that might read anti-female too.

  30. Uninvited Writer profile image82
    Uninvited Writerposted 6 years ago

    "is it a coincidence that two historical cities, completely engaged in murders, rapes, incests, sexual behaviors ranging from man-man to female-animal to groups-"

    But yet, by many...homosexuality is blamed as the only reason Sodom and Gomorrah were supposedly destroyed.

    1. Tom Cornett profile image58
      Tom Cornettposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Couldn't have said it better.  smile

    2. 0
      Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      UW, indeed, only because it is the most popular/most talked about.
      Generally speaking, Males are still viewed as socially superior.

      Interesting enough, my wife and many close friends were born/raised in a non-theist society (not as in atheist). A military society. Under communism, any form of such sexual activity is unlawful and severely punished -publicly and privately. Still evident today in much of communist China...


      In all honesty, the West and its global followers are very fortunate that its citizens accept these things. In much of the world such acts are considered heinous.

    3. Rod Marsden profile image86
      Rod Marsdenposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I agree Uninvited Writer... You are just proving my point or at least one of them...Mind you there are examples in the USA and elsewhere of Churches that are tolerant to gays so things aren't all bad.

      Twenty One Days I remember reading a report in a newspaper in the late '80s that two people in their late teens were caught kissing each other in a public park. This was deemed unlawful and indecent behavior. The two people consisted of one boy and one girl.  I thought it was a weird thing to worry about. If it had been two blokes or two girls they might have been shot or sent to the loony bin.

      In the West we do have some freedom. In Russia nowadays there's also more freedom.

  31. rebekahELLE profile image90
    rebekahELLEposted 6 years ago

    "Christianity is the most 'picked on' but the most tolerant of things. "


    hmmm, I just don't see that as a factual statement.
    tolerant?  look at this thread... the religious forum... hmm

    1. 0
      Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      rebekahELLE, I was merely making a general reference with regard to the forum topic: Christianities 'problem' with homosexuality.

      I don't see how it does have such a problem, since outwardly it is evident that such practices are very active within its organization.

      Yet the other religions are not engaged as heavily, in these types of discussions. In fact, it is most notable of in all the religious threads, postings -Christianity is mentioned more than any other regardless of the discussion topic.

      Hence my meaning of 'picked on'.

      smile

  32. 0
    sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago

    I have never un derstood why we have to know other peoples bedroom habbits. No one gay or straight should make this topic public. People who choose a gay lifestyle know the social limitations and they know they are not a combination of a man and woman. The issue I have isn't with them or their right to benefits, it's their agenda to ruin marraige and ultimately destroy or ruin what is held sacred by Christians. Their vindictive and rebellious attitude about this topic only causes me to stregthen my resolve against them until they adopt a more moderate position. This is my opinion and I'm entitled to it.smile

    1. 60
      (Q)posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      We don't need to describe for you just what kind of opinion you have provided, as that would get us banned. But, it certainly does demonstrate once again just how much Christians are out of touch with reality and the fact that they believe the world revolves around them and only them.

      Thanks Sneak, for showing us again the true nature of Christians, their bigotry and hatred for others who don't share their beliefs, which you have quoted as 'strengthening your resolve against them.' Well done.

      1. 0
        sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Good Morning Q! Well again you show your lack of tolerance and your inability to comprehend what someone has written. I clearly stated I have no problem with gays until they put my interests second to theirs. I'm against gay marraige otherwise I could careless what anyone does. Have you ever considered having an enema?(thats a joke) It amazes me how it enrages the left, no matter how nicely put, when a Christian clarifies a position the left blurts-out their nonsensical venom. Wow.

        1. 60
          (Q)posted 6 years ago in reply to this

          That's a contradiction, just like many of the other contradictions Christians provide here on a daily basis.



          Yea, sure. If it came from me, I'd get banned.



          Of course, it would appear nonsensical to the religiously indoctrinated, as it shatters the foundations of those religiously indoctrinated beliefs. No amount of insults from you will change that. big_smile

          1. 0
            sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            I haven't insuled you yet but if you are requesting one I could probably help you out. If you feel so inclined turn me in it won't the first time I've been banned.

            1. 60
              (Q)posted 6 years ago in reply to this

              You do little else here, Sneak. It's your forte.

              1. 0
                sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Wrong again Q. Are you male or female or both? I feel more comfortable talking to you if I knew.

            2. Colebabie profile image60
              Colebabieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Insults aren't necessary. On either side. Its called maturity sneak. Nothing is accomplished with insults.

              Furthermore, the only thing an insult serves to do is make the person who gave the insult feel better about themselves. Putting others down, cowardice to me. In my opinion if that is one's goal maybe religion should be reconsidered. But then that would probably make someone not insult others. Its just a cycle I guess.

              1. 0
                sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I know this game a liberal can say anything and if a conservative or Christian says anything in rebuttal they are vile insulters. It's time for mama to get a new bag.

                1. Colebabie profile image60
                  Colebabieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  No not at all, it just seems that when a Christian or Conservative (of course not all) does say something it comes off as judgmental. Good points have been made, I'm just sorry they haven't been made by you (so far).

                  And I also find it funny that a lot of people who are against homosexuality say that they are against it because it is vile, disgusting, unnatural etc. When I just can't find where in my Precious Moments bible it says that. And that those terms are in direct response to judging others, which guess what? I can find in my bible where it says not to do.

                  1. 0
                    sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Great.

      2. Jerami profile image78
        Jeramiposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        The subject matter of this thread is inviting those opinions against Homosexuality..
           Why is everyone offended when those Christians that object to homosexuality answer the question???
           By the way ...  Christians are not the only ones that have objection.  Islam and Judiasm is much less tolerant. 
           I even know some Atheists that are intolerant.

           Everyone is intolerant to something or someone.

          Ask this question concerning any subject and you will recieve diverse opinions.

    2. Mark Knowles profile image60
      Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Ruin marriage?
      Destroy or ruin what is held sacred by Christians?
      Strengthen your resolve against them?

      Is this the new meaning of "turning the other cheek," I keep hearing about?

      Like wot jeebus sed?

      1. 0
        sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        When both sides of my face have been slapped, and I've been patient, then it's on! So put on your beret and hop on down to the latin quarter and find a cafe, order a coffee and a pastry, and don't talk when your mouth is full of whatever.smile

        1. Mark Knowles profile image60
          Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Slapped face? It's on?

          Oh - you mean gay people wanting to marry each other?  Dear me - that would make your marriage worthless wouldn't it? Well - you better keep attacking them like Jesus said. Jesus must be very proud. wink

          So this attack others when you feel you have been slighted is the new meaning of "turn the other cheek."

          Kristians Kausing Konflikt

          1. 0
            sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            And again reading issues have raised they're ugly head. I clearly stated when both have been slapped then it's on. How was your coffee?

            1. Mark Knowles profile image60
              Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I am not sure your face has been slapped once - let alone twice.

              But is that wot the bible sez? 

              "But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. Should the vile person smite the other cheek - then yea verily - it is on. Deck the Mo Fo."

              Coffee was good as was the pastry. It is Bugnes season - we had them after a mountain bike ride.

              They are like little, fluffy donuts. Heaven big_smile

              http://cbertel.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/france-bugnes.jpg

              1. 0
                Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                just made me hungry again, thanks Mark.

                1. Mark Knowles profile image60
                  Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Sorry. sad You ever had these? They are awesome. They only make them around here from February - mid March.

                  1. 0
                    Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    nope, never had them.
                    why only mid march and is there a recipe for them!

                    {{ i miss fresh pastries, frickin` yanks everything is 'fresh-frozen' hor ib le }} lol

              2. 0
                sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                They look great!smile

    3. Colebabie profile image60
      Colebabieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Your opinion stems from misunderstanding and a lack of education. That sucks.

      1. 0
        sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Thanks Cole. Don't you need to wash your hair or do something like study?

        1. Colebabie profile image60
          Colebabieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Already showered and I'm on spring break.

          I was being serious.

          1. 0
            sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Oh, I know you're way smarter and more socially experienced than I am. I was also being serious. I was dismissing you and your opinion as youthful folly. Don't worry you'll grow out of it.

            1. Colebabie profile image60
              Colebabieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Well I wouldn't dismiss you and your opinion as old stubbornness. I guess that is just our difference in our level of maturity. The most frustrating thing to me is when people are uneducated and still form a strong opinion. Then say their opinion is based on all of these thoughts.

              Really, Christians have a problem with homosexuals because they believe two lines in the bible tell them to.

              Thats it. Any other opinions, or ideas about homosexuality are not based on other sources.

              1. 0
                sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Again you,ve demonstrated your vast maturity and knowledge. I won't complicate this issue by stating my level of education it would only embarass you. You just keep telling yourself how tolerant and intelligent you are, ok?

            2. 60
              (Q)posted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Colebabie is a mental giant compared to you, Sneak.

              1. 0
                sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I believe I stated that already, try and keep up.

  33. Colebabie profile image60
    Colebabieposted 6 years ago

    No one that I know that practices Judaism or is Atheist is against homosexuality. Realize that a lot of my family is atheist, and I live in South Florida. So I don't know where you are getting that info from. The president of our JSU is gay.

    1. 0
      sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Maybe your the one who needs the education.sad

      1. Colebabie profile image60
        Colebabieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Nope just a lucky girl with some open-minded friends.

        1. 0
          sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Well isn't that special. So have a good spring break get high, get naked and proclaim your understanding of life the universe and everything.

          1. Colebabie profile image60
            Colebabieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            I don't get high. Never have. Naked? I think we all are at one point in the day. And while I definitely don't know everything (and am more than willing to admit that) my open mind probably yields to a better understanding.

            1. 0
              sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Well good for you!

  34. Colebabie profile image60
    Colebabieposted 6 years ago

    Education does not mean level in school. If you wanted to know more about homosexuality you could. But you won't because your desire to learn is limited by your beliefs.

    1. 0
      sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Cole you have no idea about my life experience. Let me open the window a crack. I have said I have no problem with gays so many times but for some reason that never sticks. Let me share a view of tolerance from your side. I had a contract with a gay run company for years they loved my work and I really enjoyed doing buisness with them. I had a gay supervisor on one of my crews and he was caught stealing and I fired him. He went to my client and told them I was a Mormon. They imediately terminated our contract and when I tried to find out what the problem was they wouldn't even see me. After years of faithful service I was shown the door. Tolerance! Don't ever talk to me about tolerance you have no idea what you're talking about. Do yourself a favor and stay away from Q and Mark they are not good people. I have to go now my wife wants her Starbucks, have a nice day.

      1. livelonger profile image89
        livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Someone is bigoted to you for being a Mormon, so you have the right to be bigoted towards gay people?

        Instead of fabricating a bunch of nonsense about gays getting married having anything at all to do with your marriage (attitudes as backwards as that are probably embarrassing your children), why don't you tackle the substantial anti-Mormon bigotry that exists by people who think you aren't Christian and that you're an evil cult? It's well-known that Mitt Romney, a Mormon Republican, could win the governorship in liberal Massachusetts, but could never get the Republican nomination for president because evangelical Christians hate Mormons.

        1. 0
          sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          The marraige issue is my opinion if it's made a law I'll obey it. I know I've said that aleast once before. I personally don't care what anyone does until they ruin something that is important to me but once the law is changed I will obey it. If it's not changed will gays accept the majority decision? I suspect they won't, so who's tolerant?

          1. livelonger profile image89
            livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            You have said that you're a law-abiding citizen before, but what that has to do with gay marriage, since you're not gay, is immaterial. (You will never have to marry a gay person - what's to "obey"?!)

            Interestingly, you avoided the matter about liberals being far more accepting of Mormons than conservatives. You are probably acutely aware of that being a fact. Why you continue to kiss up to people who will never respect you is beyond me.

            1. 0
              sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I'm not kissing-up to any one read my posts on "what do you know about Mormons." If you think we shouldn't support the side of an issue we feel strongly about, why is it ok for you to support gay rights? We both have the right to support what we believe in that doesn't make us wrong or right it makes us human with the freedom of speech. Tell me why would a gay run company terminate our contract when they found out I was Mormon? They clearly stated they wanted to go a different direction out of the clear blue and my vengeful empolyee told other employees he wanted to hurt me for being so strict. I guess to some people lying and stealing is ok. Just to make it clear he was using the companies credit card to buy gas for his personal vehicle. I knew this because of the date and time on the invoices. We don't have any crews that work on Sunday or at 11pm, go figure, I was just too strict. smile

              1. livelonger profile image89
                livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                You spend half of your time here bashing liberals because they are liberals, not because you have specific policy differences with them. I know you are being half-serious when you do so, but you wouldn't dare bash conservatives in the same lighthearted manner.

                If your employee was stealing from you, he deserved to be fired. Dishonest people fired for doing something wrong always think that they were being treated unfairly. I certainly don't begrudge you firing someone like that. I would have a problem if you ascribed his behavior to all gay people.

                About the gay-run company turning down your business: that's unfortunate but it was either after Prop 8 or the owner was an ex-Mormon and thus has strong feelings against Mormons. (The Mormon-bashing Websites I've seen are either run by evangelical Christians or ex-Mormons) I don't think it's fair to assume all Mormons supported their church's heavy financial and organizational involvement in Prop 8; Steve Young was just one prominent example of a Mormon who was against Prop 8.

                1. 0
                  sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  We're all different and I decide for myself what is right for me. My wife isn't Mormon she's evangelical Christian we never put each other down but we do tease each other in a very freindly manner. We purposely let our son choose his own way, all we did was love him. I'm not a perfect Mormon or anything but for the purpose of social debate I defend my beliefs as anyone would. If you came to Houston and wanted to visit I would gladly take you to dinner and share a laugh. I would gladly buy you a margarita even though I don't drink. I know we're all different and thats what makes up a world.smile

              2. 60
                (Q)posted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Your belief is based on an invisible sky fairy living in a magical kingdom telling you to hate someone else. Your free to bleat such speech and insist that the sky fairy is right.



                Perhaps, they suspected you would make your decisions based on an invisible sky fairy telling you hate others, and guess what, you did! They were right.

          2. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
            Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            If the law is changed to only GAY marriage is legal will you follow it sneak?

            How about if they change hetrosexual union to being Illegal because it is an abomination? would you leave your wife and marry a man?


            that is what your asking Gay men to do.

            1. 0
              sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Well as it stands the law is equal for all. I can't marry a man but a gay man can marry a woman the same as I can that seems pretty equal. If the law is changed I'll live with it but I don't have to like it.smile

              1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
                Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                So if the law was that you could only have sex with a person of the same sex you'd follow it? You wouldn't try and have it changed?

                You wouldn't 'break' the law and have sex with a person of the opposite sex?

                1. 0
                  sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Well you're talking to a Christian so in the first place I wouldn't have sex outside of marraige. So if I were gay and I couldn't marry I would choose to be celebit. I believe we're not suppose to commit adultry and we're not suppose to covent another mans wife and everybody we have sex with that we don't intend to marry is someone elses partner. So if you're gay or hetero and you're having sex outside of marraige it's obvious the only point you can argue is religion a bunch of bull. So from the Christian perspective you should control your urges unless of course you liken yourself to an animal and don't have any control.smile

                  1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
                    Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    You didn't answer the question.

                    Mikel G Roberts wrote:
                    So if the law was that you could only have sex with a person of the same sex you'd follow it?

                    You wouldn't try and have the law changed?

                    You wouldn't 'break' the law and have sex with a person of the opposite sex? A person that you knew in your heart God wants you to be with?

                2. 0
                  sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Sorry, I was totally disillutioned when I found out women aren't as interested in sex as men are. I never quite got over the fact they could say no to something that felt that good. That lesson hit me hard after I was married at 19y/o and totally blew me away.(I was pretty nieve about the world of sex all I knew was I liked it, I loved it and wanted more of it:D) So I decided there was no reason to pack up my riffles and fishing poles and stay home all the time. Which at that age I would have gladly done. big_smile

                  1. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
                    Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    You still didn't answer the question.

                    You wouldn't try and have the law changed?

                    You wouldn't 'break' the law and have sex with a person of the opposite sex?
                    A person that you knew in your heart God wants you to be with?

      2. Mark Knowles profile image60
        Mark Knowlesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        That is pretty offensive, sweetie pie. Just because I despise religionists and point out your hypocrisy - that does not make me a bad person.

        1. 0
          sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Oh pray tell what would? I know if you were a Christian or a conservative! Silly me that was a stupid question.

      3. 60
        (Q)posted 6 years ago in reply to this

        So, you're good people because you are bigoted and hate gays due to your religious beliefs. We're bad people because we defend their position and point out your hypocrisy. Okey dokey.

        1. 0
          sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Whatever.

  35. 0
    Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago

    i am in NYC, but really, really good pastry is hard to find. especially fresh -from scratch.

    we do have a fresh Ukrainian/Lithuanian bakery over here, yum.
    i should be the size of a small flat or four heart attacks in from all the butter. smile

  36. 0
    Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago

    oops, did i go off topic? fine off to the food forum.

  37. TheGlassSpider profile image81
    TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago

    *slinks off to the food forum*

  38. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
    Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago
    1. 0
      sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Great song! Great message!smile

  39. osionline profile image60
    osionlineposted 6 years ago

    A true and genuine Christian will hate homosexual or safe sex marriage because God forbids it and we should not forget Sodom and Gomorrah in the Bible.

    1. earnestshub profile image87
      earnestshubposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      So based on the OT version of "morals and laws" you are a self admitted homophobe.
      Do you wear leather, mix cotton with other materials, eat animals with cloven hoof?
      This seams hypocritical to me.
      These ignorant fear based beliefs cause fellow humans to be marginalised and badly treated.

      Disgusted!

    2. Obscurely Diverse profile image60
      Obscurely Diverseposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      For all "osionline" knows, God must like homosexuals since "it" created so damn many of them...  Yeah, take that in ya divine rectum...  Ha-ha!

    3. livelonger profile image89
      livelongerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      You misread the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. As usual, Christian zealots see homosexuality in everything.

      1. earnestshub profile image87
        earnestshubposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        ain't that the truth! smile

  40. 0
    Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago

    homosexuality is not created, it is accepted.
    many gay men will openly tell you they do not like being gay, but see no alternative. Actually, most dislike other gay people.

    it is likened to alcoholism, an chemical imbalance in the brain, a dependency, addiction. It is NOT a character flaw but a chemical alteration.

    so much for divine rectum. "ha ha".


    the level of human intellectual naivety is astounding.

    1. Obscurely Diverse profile image60
      Obscurely Diverseposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      You're full of sh*t!  Alcohol has nothing to do with homosexuality.  If that's the case, by drinking alcohol,  I'd be homo.  Alcohol doesn't cause homosexuals to arise...  Ha-ha!  I can go much further into this, Mr. Anal Dweller, as you know nothing about Health Science; you claim more than you know; you're a damn idiot; put nicely...

      1. 0
        Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        are you actually stamping your feet? LOL. really? you're funny.

        tell you what, you personally attack me again, and it's flag land for you, "buddy". so a little intellect and we might take you seriously.

        If you read the post correctly, the association between them is not a defense or offense for either. It simply states the two are identical in nature. Can you find where I stated homosexuality IS alcoholism or induced by alcohol, no I don't think so.

        1. Obscurely Diverse profile image60
          Obscurely Diverseposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Flag land?  Attack?  Ha-ha!  Maybe I'm just not as sensitive as you.
          I would never flag anybody even if they called me all sorts of "names"...
          Your alcohol statement is asinine; what else can I say?  It is erroneous, that's all I said.  You are the one who mocked the "divine rectum" joke...Ha-ha!  I'm not gay nor do I think it is a productive act, but I do have enough sense to know that most of these people are born like that.  You are the only one that threats due to fear of challenging intellect.

      2. 0
        Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        "Your alcohol statement is asinine"

        strike two.
        go ahead, make my day...

        ps, I would easily accept the likes of Knowles, Cagsil and Earnest intellect -even Q (though it pains me to say that) before even remotely considering your prideful, selfish and -seriously- redundant intellect. At least these men have something of value or humor to engage...

        as they say in the Bronx: s`up son?

        1. Obscurely Diverse profile image60
          Obscurely Diverseposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I'm headstrong, please forgive me.  Ha-ha!  I think you take the prize when it comes to utter sensitivity!   I suppose I should try a different tact and should only address you with "master," "your majesty," and royal kingly kingship?  Ha-ha-ha!  Hilarious...  Hey, just some quick advice:  real life doesn't involve censorship or "political correctness."  Your best reply would be to leave a smiley face in response; ha-ha!

          1. 0
            Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            hey thanks, some more advice, bugger off. Hiyo!


            Now, where were we...

            1. Obscurely Diverse profile image60
              Obscurely Diverseposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              That's what I thought...  big_smile

              1. 0
                Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                yip, sunshine, and you keep thinkin` that. cheers.
                ya`ll down south might recognize this:

                if ya cain't bark with the big dawgs, stay on the porch.
                night night.

                1. Obscurely Diverse profile image60
                  Obscurely Diverseposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  I never knew there was a challenge, as you provided nothing but hogwash...

        2. Obscurely Diverse profile image60
          Obscurely Diverseposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I just seen your "PS" comment:  Thanks; I take that as a compliment!  LOL!

  41. Colebabie profile image60
    Colebabieposted 6 years ago

    Homosexuality is not a disease.

    1. 0
      Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      who said it was a disease? Alcoholism is NOT a disease, neither is homosexuality. It is a chemical imbalance induced by outside influences.

      next.

      1. Uninvited Writer profile image82
        Uninvited Writerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Where did you get that information?

        1. 0
          Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          yes I can support it, UW. I know many a-sexual and homosexual people, as well as, 'recovering' alcoholics. Both agree -as with sexual addiction- homosexuality is simply a mindset of chemical imbalance. It is not genetic. It is kinetic if anything.
          It is generally considered that both sex addicts and homophobes/homosexuals share the same "tonin" reactions.

          It is all chemical.

          1. earnestshub profile image87
            earnestshubposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Ignorant and thinly disguised homophobia is not very scientific in my view. smile

            1. 0
              Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              i am not homophobic, Earnest, some of my closest friends are homosexual and they even despise -as the term goes- fags and fag hags. In fact, one of my friends works for the largest cruise ship chain as a dancer/entertainer and he even agrees that his 'choice' of lifestyle has nothing to do with being born that way. He has actually seen himself getting married to a female and having a family. He -like many- agree that something chemically or socially effected them to cause their acceptance/seeking of alternate sexuality. A "necro" or "nympho" is not different in sexuality than an a-sexual or homosexual...

              1. earnestshub profile image87
                earnestshubposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I stick with what I said.
                I lived in Prahran an inner city suburb of Melbourne (4 million pop.) and like many inner city folk, we always went to the gay festival every year. I have gay friends, so do my children and even their children. Never have I heard any person say they were not born that way.My gay friends are educated middle class mostly

                I just straight out do not believe you.

                I would like to see how long you would last in one of the many conversations in the gay coffee shops we have.
                Frequented by straights like me who like the coffee and the people.

                1. 0
                  Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Actually, Earnest, I have had many a conversation with a collective 'recovering group' of people and 'sexual' group at the same time ( Manhattan pop, 8 million on an average day).

                  Over brews and bullocks we have talked. I would say 99% of sexual and 'recovering dependents' have exactly the same views. Maybe its "Americana" but still it lends some merit.

      2. earnestshub profile image87
        earnestshubposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Next is right! smile

    2. 0
      sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I've heard they have a vacination for it.big_smile

  42. Colebabie profile image60
    Colebabieposted 6 years ago

    Addiction is not a disease? Hmm.

    I agree for the most part with you. But I would have left the alcoholism reference out of it. It doesn't make any sense.

    1. Cagsil profile image83
      Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Actually, "addiction" is only seen as a disease because of the pharma companies and the medical industry found a market for their drugs.

      An addiction is basically a lack of self-control. Is it due to a chemical imbalance in the body, which cannot be overcome by will, highly doubtful. Simply because of the unknown limits to the human mind and human will, both which cannot be measured.

      An addiction, such as cocaine or heroin, or meth or even crack, can be overcame by sheer mind over matter and will of determination to beat it.

      As least, that's my take on it. However, this entire conversation is about homosexuality and christians? Both are misconceptions, spun to incite separation of citizens.

      But, that's another story altogether and I'm not going to disrupt this forum and get further off topic.

      Have a good day and luck with conversation. hmm

  43. Colebabie profile image60
    Colebabieposted 6 years ago

    I don't agree with you Twenty One, sorry.

  44. Jerami profile image78
    Jeramiposted 6 years ago

    Accepted behaveior ?? .. What is it ?..  Who gets to decide? .. Where do we draw the line? .. Who gets to draw it? ..
    The old preacher man who has never gotten out of the Missionary position that thinks that foreplay is sinful?... Or the man who loves sheep? ... or the pediophyle? 
       We want someplace in between to be called a place called normal.
       And everyone believes that he/she should be considered the standard for normal.   I'm OK you'r are you OK.  ?? 
       We are all OK !.....?   What does your neighbor think?
       Should he decide what is normal? 
       That depends upon what he thinks huh ?

    1. 0
      Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Deleted

      1. Jerami profile image78
        Jeramiposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Are you talking to me   What????

        1. Juliet Christie profile image59
          Juliet Christieposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I suppose I would say to each his own. You may like to read my real take on this in a hub I wrote in response to this question

  45. TheGlassSpider profile image81
    TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago

    Research has yet to reveal to us everything there is to know about the question of how sexual orientation occurs in humans; however, some things are certain. Homosexuality is NOT a disease OR a chemical imbalance. Doctors do not diagnose it and the DSM (the manual of mental disorders used by mental health practitioners) have not considered homosexuality pathological for many years; the AMA, APA, and ACA do NOT condone the treatment of homosexuality as a disease or a disorder.

    Check out this forum for some interesting discussion about why gay people are gay: http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/32331
    One of the best things about that thread is this link from AEvans:
    http://www.thetech.org/genetics/ask.php?id=155

    Research points out that the issue of “how sexual orientation happens” is more complex than we usually like to think or talk about; however, one thing seems to be the case for sure, and that is by the time one is born, one’s sexual disposition is already in place.

    A twin study in 2000 examined over 1,500 same-sex identical and fraternal male and female twin pairs. “The researchers found a concordance rate (the percentage of pairs in which both twins are homosexual) of 20% among identical male twins and 0% among pairs of male fraternal twins. The corresponding concordance rates for female identical and fraternal twins were 24% and 10.5%, respectively (Bailey et al., 2000). The markedly higher concordance rates for identical twin pairs provide strong evidence of a genetic component to sexual orientation” (Crooks & Baur, 2008).

    Other research is examining the role of hormones on the fetus during prenatal development. “These research findings…strongly suggest the importance of prenatal influences—hormonal and other—and brain development on sexual orientation. Research on human subjects indicates that higher levels of masculinizing prenatal hormones in female fetuses are associated with lesbianism. It further indicates that, depending on the characteristic, higher levels of prenatal masculinizing or feminizing hormones in male fetuses are associated with male homosexuality” (Crooks & Baur, 2008).

    Finally, for those who seem to think that homosexuality is SO unnatural. According to Crooks and Baur (2008), “The world’s first museum exhibition about homosexuality among animals opened in 2006 at the Oslo Natural History Museum in Norway. Male and female homosexuality has been observed in more than 1,500 animal species and is well documented for 500 animals. Giraffes, parrots, penguins, beetles, or hyenas exhibit some of the bisexual behavior of the bonobo, a type of chimpanzee that has sexual interactions with both males and females as a means of social bonding.”

    Crooks, R. & Baur, K. (2008). Our Sexuality. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.

    1. 0
      sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Well animals are dumb, sorry. I don't think that is how gays want their sexual preference represented as similar to animals.

      1. TheGlassSpider profile image81
        TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        With all due respect, in my experience there are animals that are more intelligent that some humans I've met. I certainly didn't mean to degrade anyone by pointing out that homosexuality is not limited to humans, and I'm sure even you know that.  There are plenty of heterosexual animals in nature as well, even monogamous ones...that's not an insult to straight or monogamous people, it's just a fact. What else do you suggest I compare it to, since we're talking about whether or not something is "natural." We really only have other species who also have sex to compare it with. *shrug* Shall we compare the sexuality of plants? Cells? How about species who are entirely female? I think you'll find even in those places in nature sexuality is not as limited as many people would think.

        1. 0
          sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Glass I was being my normal self, a smartass!smile

          1. TheGlassSpider profile image81
            TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Oh well...and I was  being my normal over-analytical self. smile

            1. 0
              sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Thats cool! I'm about done with the gay arguements anyway. It always ends in fighting and insults. I like you all too much to take a chance on making an enemy.smile

  46. 0
    Twenty One Daysposted 6 years ago

    spider, though some points are noteworthy, this statement:

    "Research points out that the issue of “how sexual orientation happens” is more complex than we usually like to think or talk about; however, one thing seems to be the case for sure, and that is by the time one is born, one’s sexual disposition is already in place.

    is inadequate, given the nature of the subjects used for the case study. Some view it as a 'disease' which I strongly disagree with, other view it as a moral dysfunction, which also I disagree with.

    If anything defies the natural order of things, it is within the individual or collective expression. This would make it the same as any other chemical imbalance. No one is born a racist, alcoholic, substance abuser, nymphomaniac, religionista, scientist or even spiritualist. These things come as result of either self indulgence or influence leading to that indulgence.

    1. TheGlassSpider profile image81
      TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I stated clearly that homosexuality is not a disease or disorder. Chemical imbalances are considered among diseases and disorders and can be diagnosed. Homosexuality cannot.

      I think I must not have expressed it clearly, but the Crooks and Baur book has a section within it that reviews the work of many researchers. I merely chose a couple of examples to illustrate here, since this is just a forum and not my personal dissertation platform. In other words, that was only one study. There is MUCH more evidence to back it up and if you would like I would be glad to list all their references, but you'd have to give me some time. There's so many of them, you know.

      Also, I think I did clearly address the strange issue of homosexuality being "unnatural". I understand that the majority of humans are heterosexual, but not all of them. Besides that, the whole of nature demonstrates a wide, imaginative range of sexuality and gender--including homosexuality and bisexuality. I don't know how natural you have to have it--it *occurs in nature*?  hmm

      "No one is born a racist, alcoholic, substance abuser, nymphomaniac, religionista, scientist or even spiritualist." I agree (although some research points to there being a genetic component to substance abuse). What do these things have to do with being born homosexual? Are you saying that all these things are also chemical imbalances?

      You're welcome to believe whatever you want. But seriously, at least read recent, well-researched material before you make such generalizations about something like sexual orientation (and I'm not saying my posts here are...grab some of the reference material, it's worth it). It is a very complicated issue, as I mentioned before.

      1. Onusonus profile image86
        Onusonusposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I have always thought that being drunk is a chemical imbalance.

        1. TheGlassSpider profile image81
          TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Drunkenness is a state of being intoxicated with too much of the poison ethanol. However, alcohol abuse and alcohol dependence are disorders (according to the DSM-IV-TR) that involve regular, uncontrolled over-use of the toxin that results in a tolerance for it (at least initially), among other distinct symptoms.

  47. defenestratethis profile image60
    defenestratethisposted 6 years ago

    Ive always wondered, if homosexuality is a choice, then doesnt that mean that heterosexuality is too? I dont remember ever choosing to to be straight, I just was.

    1. 0
      sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Now you've done it! You have thrown a wrench into the works! Good job!smile

      Welcome to the Hubs.

      1. defenestratethis profile image60
        defenestratethisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Yo sneak! Thanks dude. smile

  48. TheGlassSpider profile image81
    TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago

    I try real hard not to be insulting. I think I must come off in text as dry and cynical and perhaps insulting  sad Although it's hard for me to tell...I "hear" myself in a pretty calm tone usually (unless I'm YELLING or something) lol

    1. 0
      sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      You come off as being lucid and intelligent. We haven't been on the same side of an issue yet but I'd partner up with you!smile

      1. TheGlassSpider profile image81
        TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        smile Aww, thank you smile Same here...We're bound to find some common ground somewhere.

        Do you like good food?

        1. 0
          sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Gimme a break! I'm a pig!big_smile

          1. TheGlassSpider profile image81
            TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Well there it is. Italian food, gourmet cheese, barbeque, fruits...you name it. I like to cook it and eat it. We'll have to start a thread.

            1. 0
              sneakorocksolidposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              I'm there! We'll have do a review on favorite dishes! This will be fun! Well it's my bedtime and I have church at 8am so I'm going to say goodnight but we'll definately talk! Good night and God bless.smile

              1. TheGlassSpider profile image81
                TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Great idea!

                Good night and God bless you too!smile

      2. Mikel G Roberts profile image87
        Mikel G Robertsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        @glass spider you came across as: Concise, clear, informed, well articulated and very patient.

        1. TheGlassSpider profile image81
          TheGlassSpiderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Thank you smile I'm glad to hear that. I appreciate it.

  49. Jerami profile image78
    Jeramiposted 6 years ago

    Is there anything wrong with a man loving a woman? NO
        Is there anything wrong with a man loving a man?  No
         "   "      "       "     "  " woman loving a woman ? No
         
                 So what is the big deal ? 
       
            What is the definition of a sin?
       I think ..anything that is harmful to your self or others.
    Period. There are many harmful things that we can and do to ourselves. Should everyone respect me for filling my nose with marbles?  NO.  Respect my right to do this to myself, YES.

      The "SIN" (harm to self or others) would be the anal penetration and ejaculation.
      The intestins are designed to absorb anything that can be absorbed for nutrients directly into the blood stream.
      The sperm is programed to penetrate. It does not take a rocket scientist to see that this disturbs the natural balance of nature. 
       We should recognize what the exit door was intended for.
       I respect anyone's right to pack their ears with mashed potatoes ...  Do I respect them for doing so??  No

       Can "anyone" force  anyone else to respect them?
       I have the right to wear a BIG bone in my nose. My friends may say that it looks great. But you will laugh at me for thinking that it looks good..?..
       
       Homosexuals are discriminated against.. so are fat people. short people, ugly people, dumb people, people that speak with a lisp. etc., etc.,

      It seems that everyone thinks that they are;  smarter, better looking, stronger etc than someone else..
      We do not live in a perfect world cause nobody can agree upon what that perfect world should be like. 
       We need to get over it..
       Nobody is going to be respected by all.

  50. 0
    Brenda Durhamposted 6 years ago

    Sin is more than that;  although often based on whether it's harmful to one'sself or others, yes.....

    1. 60
      (Q)posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Divorce is a sin, yes?

    2. Jerami profile image78
      Jeramiposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I agree that Sin is more than just that.
        But when we boil it down to basics as Jesus did by stating that to love God with all of our heart and love one another as we love ourselves encompases the rest,
         When we look at the biger picture we will see that there are sins against the body and sins against the spirit. These are intertwined but individual.
         When an action is not damaging to the body or spirit  is it sin?

 
working